Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Holy Hyperthreading Batman

Holy Hyperthreading Batman

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
comhelp
24 Posts 12 Posters 5 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • L Lost User

    Rick York wrote:

    Unfortunately, I seem to be seeing a bug with the OMP library. It doesn't seem to handle that many threads correctly.

    Are you are actually trying to implement a single process with 80 threads... ? If so... why? Hopefully you are just testing to see what happens. Best Wishes, -David Delaune

    D Offline
    D Offline
    dandy72
    wrote on last edited by
    #21

    Randor wrote:

    Are you are actually trying to implement a single process with 80 threads... ? If so... why?

    It all depends on what these threads are doing. Here's a real-world example: I have a tiny utility sitting in my system tray that runs many small WMI queries across my LAN to refresh hardware configuration data from remote machines at startup. The payload is very small, so the LAN can take it, but WMI queries are inherently very slow, so it made sense here to dedicate not only one thread per machine, but one thread per query (each machine runs maybe a dozen WMI queries). Multiply that by a dozen machines, and it very quick adds up. What used to be a queued set of queries that took 10+ minutes to complete is now a bunch of threads starting in parallel and all completing within 30 seconds. [Edit] Of course this doesn't imply I need an 80-core machine to run this. :-) Just saying it's not all that unreasonable to spawn this many threads, even if just for a limited time.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • D Dave Kreskowiak

      That's cute. AMD just gave Intel the finger with the announcement of the 2nd gen Threadripper. 32 cores, 64 threads, and 250W of heat to get rid of. Drop of a couple of those on a motherboard.

      Asking questions is a skill CodeProject Forum Guidelines Google: C# How to debug code Seriously, go read these articles.
      Dave Kreskowiak

      D Offline
      D Offline
      dandy72
      wrote on last edited by
      #22

      Dave Kreskowiak wrote:

      and 250W of heat to get rid of.

      I've only ever owned one AMD-based system. I called it the space heater. I see they still haven't dealt with the one reason I was happy to get rid of it. With an expected high of 35C (excluding humidity) over the weekend, I'll happily continue ignoring AMD's latest offerings.

      D 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • D dandy72

        Dave Kreskowiak wrote:

        and 250W of heat to get rid of.

        I've only ever owned one AMD-based system. I called it the space heater. I see they still haven't dealt with the one reason I was happy to get rid of it. With an expected high of 35C (excluding humidity) over the weekend, I'll happily continue ignoring AMD's latest offerings.

        D Offline
        D Offline
        Dave Kreskowiak
        wrote on last edited by
        #23

        I hear that. I've got a 6700K in my machine, running 24x7, and it does a nice job keeping the office warm at 95W(?)

        Asking questions is a skill CodeProject Forum Guidelines Google: C# How to debug code Seriously, go read these articles.
        Dave Kreskowiak

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • R Rajesh R Subramanian

          OriginalGriff wrote:

          It's a bit underutilized ...

          Just install Symantec antivirus and it will take care of the rest. :-\

          D Offline
          D Offline
          David Cunningham
          wrote on last edited by
          #24

          Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:

          Just install Symantec antivirus and it will take care of the rest.

          Ain't that the truth.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          Reply
          • Reply as topic
          Log in to reply
          • Oldest to Newest
          • Newest to Oldest
          • Most Votes


          • Login

          • Don't have an account? Register

          • Login or register to search.
          • First post
            Last post
          0
          • Categories
          • Recent
          • Tags
          • Popular
          • World
          • Users
          • Groups