Re: PII vs PIII

From: kony (spam_at_spam.com)
Date: 10/13/03 

Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 18:54:31 GMT

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 09:58:43 -0600, "Steve Wolfe" <un@codon.com>
wrote:

>> > I haven't used a stopwatch, so I can't say "On my uniprocesser machine
>> >under (whatever) load, it would take ten seconds for the "start" menu to
>> >come up, or (x) seconds for a login terminal to come up."
>>
>> Your system had a severe problem which was unrelated to the number of
>> processors.
>
> How do you know?

Because there is no reason for a 10 second delay. It wasn't due to
having a single CPU unless the task that was running was improperly
assigned a high or time-critical priority. Tasks that are actually
time-critical, like video capture or CDRW/DVD burning, don't even come
near the delay you mention. If that specific software is THAT bad,
you need either reassign it's priority, or replace it if possible.

>
>> > However, from personal experience, I can say that the difference under
>> >equivalent loads can literally be the difference between waiting 10-20
>> >seconds from entering your password and the # prompt vs. waiting half a
>> >second to get the prompt.
>>
>> Again, a severe problem having nothing to do with the number of CPUs.
>
> How do you know?
>
> If "heavy load" to you means "a problem", I suppose.

These things you've been mentioning, acting like they cause delays, do
NOT cause delays on a normally-working single-CPU system.

On a single-CPU system I can transfer Gigs of files over a lan, while
processing a video capture, capturing ANOTHER video, listening to an
MP3, and a dozen other background tasks. The single CPU system
(actually I have multiple systems set up for this video capture and
editing work) runs at 100% full load for hours at a time. It isn't
some "test", I do similar activities multiple times per week, for
hours. NEVER is there even the slightest delay, let alone seconds.
Granted this requires at least 3 HDDs to do capture AND
post-processing simultaneously, but NOT 2 CPUs.

The only time having a single CPU is a problem is when there's another
semi-time-critical application running, like a modern game. Depending
on the process priorties either the game or the video work loses
performance... if the game framerate drops too low it IS a problem,

 and it would be very beneficial to use 2 CPUs,

but still there'd be a FSB and memory bottleneck, it would be more
effective to use a 2nd computer, and considering the extra expense of
the second CPU and dually motherboard in a 2 CPU system, a second
system isn't that much of an additional expense.

>> Dual CPU systems CAN feel more responsive, but not anywhere near what
>> you're mentioning above, and this responsiveness is typically only
>> worthwhile when running a high-priority app and trying to do something
>> else demanding, simultaneously... not just mucking around in the GUI.
>
> Then you're saying I'm a liar?

I'm giving my version of the " truth". If it conflicts with your
version, so be it. If I were going to call you a liar I would just
come right out and say it.

I think it's most likely that your system usage, probably the
applications, are screwed up, don't work properly, so they totally
consume the entire CPU. Another possibility is HDD problems, or
chipset/PCI bus issues. Don't even begin to think you're the only
person doing more than one demanding task simultaneously, many people
do but never have a 10 second delay for something as simple as the
start menu no matter how hard they try to create one.

>
>> Ah, time and time again people want links. Today we have the best
>> search engine ever known to mankind... bet you a nickel it'll find
>> benchmarks.
>
> I'll bet you TWO nickels it already did.

Yep, but then why ask for links?

Dave

Relevant Pages

  • [PATCH 1/3] Change return value from queue_work
    ... The new routines call the original ... unsigned long delay) ... struct work_struct *work) ... We queue the work to the CPU it was submitted, ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Fixes for nforce2 hard lockup, apic, io-apic, udma133 covered
    ... >> your existing code path so I think I was being too optimistic in the ... > Maybe it scales with bus speed, not CPU internal speed? ... after about 6 hrs on 800ns delay timeout. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: 306 Borg Winner
    ... running the borg at top speed with a "below normal" priority might use ... 100% CPU but not cripple the UI's responsiveness or make your work not ... delay to the minimum, then if you have problems increase it. ... inadequate CPU cooling prior to their acquisition by HP; ...
    (rec.games.roguelike.angband)
  • Re: Make buildworld failure
    ... >> way to speed up the make buildworld process by spawning multiple ... time even on a single CPU system simply because you can keep both disks ... disk you'll probably see that the CPU is idle for some percentage of the ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: Uses for memory barriers
    ... of memory ordering are not all that helpful in explaining memory ordering ... My "seen" approach would work for all CPU architectures ... ordering -- it makes sense only in the context of a single CPU. ... line contained per-CPU sequence numbers. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)