No. because of this -- " ... represent most of the bulk of the software sold out there in cyberland" .... it is probably 1/2 or more is multithreaded. Everything else is about right, though i would disagree with the 10% number ... it will vary pretty wildly from just a little to 20% or more for some single threaded apps. However, I would not say he is wrong because either of us could be right, we will know when the processor arrives.Originally Posted by natty
Jack
Last edited by JumpingJack; 08-14-2008 at 11:47 PM.
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
I'd say that 10% is far too high estimation.
50%+
Most programs don't need it though.
http://www.digit-life.com/articles3/...-e4x00-p1.html
I'd say that 10% is far too high estimation.
50%+
Most programs don't need it though.
His software list is pretty well representative of both professional an non-professional applications available today.
Gen-2 games of course are not, but the majority of contemporary games are. Multicore processors have been out > 3 years now.
A month or two ago I was alsowhen someone said that same thing, then when I went out and actually looked... it's true, about 1/2 of what you can find is multithreaded (excluding the sharecrapware) and there is a multithreaded app available for most all catagories of usages you can find.
Video encoding -- yep.
NLE -- Yep
Photography -- yep
Games -- yep
compression -- yep
Software has done a more to catch up that what we realize.
On the single threaded material... it will vary, but you will be shocked when the numbers come out I suspect. What is more shocking, and make note of this ... it will be hard to find more single threaded benchmark data since there will be much much less of it when the reviews come.
Last edited by JumpingJack; 08-15-2008 at 02:27 AM.
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
You are right but just opening multiple threads and utilizing all this threads is still a very big different. I other words .. whats better ? : 2 full utilized Core or all cores with 12.5 % (quad core).
For examble:
Just found out that video encoding (Nero Suite) scales very well from 1 to 2 Cores (About 1.8x) but from 1 to 4 its only about 2.7x, which means one core is totaly obsolet.
It doesnt mean 1 core is obsolete. Its about diminishing returns.
Crunching for Comrades and the Common good of the People.
Again, depends on the specific encoder and settings used.
x264 is one that scales well, 100% usage for 8 cores (it's been reported 16 cores as well and probably more when it comes out) when settings are maxxed out
You are right x264 is a perfect example for very well optimized SMT (But thats the absolulty minor at least for Desktop APPs). Just try to recode a DVD to xvid and you will not scale as well.
I just wanted to say that you wont get a massive perfomance gain with a nehalem just because of the fact the application uses multithreading. Still depending on how good SMT scales with the cores.
Good point, I never said that the multithreaded apps were well multithreadedWindows Media Encoder will only split off two threads .. is another example.
The reason I made this point is about 2-3 months ago, I was developing a multitasking test scenario. What I wanted was one case where I had one dual threaded app, and two single threaded apps, in other cases I wanted all just general threaded apps.
It is now hard to find general single threaded apps that represent a mainstream like applications that puts any kind of load on the processor.
Jack
Last edited by JumpingJack; 08-15-2008 at 06:17 AM.
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
We ve seen some News, about Nehalem launch in mid of September. Because i have a CPU and board too, i am waiting for NDA lifts ... but today i received message - end of NDA is postponed to October.
Did the message specify any specific time in October? I am really looking forward to Bloomfield and I'd like to get one soon, as I just sold my P35 motherboard and about to sell my QX9650
EVGA X58 SLI Classified E759 Limited Edition
Intel Core i7 Extreme 980X Gulftown six-core
Thermalright TRUE Copper w/ 2x Noctua NF-P12s (push-pull)
2x EVGA GeForce GTX 590 Classified [Quad-SLI]
6GB Mushkin XP Series DDR3 1600MHz 7-8-7-20
SilverStone Strider ST1500 1500W
OCZ RevoDrive 3 240GB 1.0GB/s PCI-Express SSD
Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty Professional / Logitech G51 5.1 Surround
SilverStone Raven RV02
Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RTM
in first or second week
Ooopppp, did not see this message posted a couple of weeks ago.... should take a moment to answer.
You will find this to be true for many applications, in some others not so true and scaling is very good. There are a couple of reasons for this...
In general, two ways to look at computational parallelism ... 1) Task based and 2) data set based.
Let me explain 2 first -- data based parallism is basically a pool of data that needs to be crunched, and each element in the data domain is independent of any other. Software can then thread up as many threads as it likes, and the data set divided into as many subsets as needed, and away you go. This provides almost perfect scaling, because the thread is only depending on the data it is working on. Examples of this are GPUs with rendering and shading textures, or ray-tracing through divying up a scene (example, Cinebench cuts the scene into quarters and each thread goes as fast as the complextity of that segment takes it ... some segments finish earlier, and as such the remaining segment divides up again and off they go).
For 1, think of this as taking a single threaded instruction stream and looking for ways to chop it up into segments, sending each segment through in parallel. The problem is if your the segments you generate depend on the output or result of another there is ambiguity ... this type of programming is very difficult to achieve because the programmer must know something about the way the code behaves. Examples include -- cpu portion of gaming code, video encoding (predictive framing, motion compensation), etc. In this type of situation, Amdahl's Law comes into play, where no matter what you do no matter what you try, the speed up of a program spread over several execution resources will never scale to the multple of the total number of resources available... specifically due to the interdependency.
Then there is also other problems with thread level parallelism, mostly do to memory management. Example, a shared main memory pool serviced by discrete cache pools. There exists the possibility that as a address in main memory is copied between the two different discrete caches, one processor may change the information in one cache that at some point the thread on the other core will need access to. The ambiguity of discrete caches to have altered data at any point in time creates the coherency problem, which the CPU must rationalize before it can proceed. This of itself slows down the parallel speedup one may achieve in just the overhead in cohering the caches. This is true in most all cases, and special protocols are used to try and make it as efficient as possible.
So, in summary ... simply adding more cores to the problem will not guarantee a subsequent speed up in execution commensurate with the number of cores added. What I mean is, don't expect a 2x speed up going from 2 cores to 4, and don't expect 2x going from 4 to 8.
Jack
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
And you say that this list is representative?http://www.digit-life.com/articles3/...-e4x00-p1.html
His software list is pretty well representative of both professional an non-professional applications available today.
Gen-2 games of course are not, but the majority of contemporary games are. Multicore processors have been out > 3 years now.
A month or two ago I was also
Video encoding -- yep.
NLE -- Yep
Photography -- yep
Games -- yep
compression -- yep
Software has done a more to catch up that what we realize.
On the single threaded material... it will vary, but you will be shocked when the numbers come out I suspect. What is more shocking, and make note of this ... it will be hard to find more single threaded benchmark data since there will be much much less of it when the reviews come.
How about office programs?
How about internet programs?
How about desktop management programs?
How about shell extensions?
How about tiny tools that do simple jobs?
How about media players and managers?
How about system management programs?
On the list you get mostly professional tools + games + archivers. Usually costly ones.
BTW on my computer I have 2 programs from the list. 1 is multithreaded. And used it like 2 times during ~year since I installed it.
Last edited by m^2; 08-15-2008 at 12:52 PM.
Yes, I think it is.
Excel is multithreaded. Not sure of the other apps, I thinkHow about office programs?
IE7 I don't think is, but flash adobe is most of the adobe suite.How about internet programs?
Haven't researched this, sure there are some that are and some that aren't. A savvy, computer knowledgeable person would know what they wanted and what it does.How about desktop management programs?
Shell extensions are usually simple little utilities, not sure it is even needed. But to mention a few... Winrar, winzip also install as shell extensions and are multithreaded.How about shell extensions?
Define tiny?How about tiny tools that do simple jobs?
PowerDVD is multithreaded, as is WinDVD -- two very common apps.How about media players and managers?
Lasts I looked, both Windows XP and Vista managed multiple cores and threads.How about system management programs?
Again, one site who does a very comprehensive test suite enumerates a large portion of software representative from most usage scenarios and which are multithreaded:
http://www.digit-life.com/articles3/...08-3-0-p1.html
I don't know about you, but looking through that list it appears more software is > 1 thread than that this is single threaded.
Then you are not really using a computer, or don't know how. You are probably wasting your money... and definitely your time posting to a power user forum.TW on my computer I have 2 programs from the list. 1 is multithreaded. And used it like 2 times during ~year since I installed it.
Last edited by JumpingJack; 08-29-2008 at 08:45 AM.
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
Excel is far from being "most office apps".
Flash is not internet, but multimedia program. No browser, email client, IM, downloader I know of is multithreaded.
I seriusly doubt that more than 1% of them is multithreaded. Actually I don't know even one...and it seems neither you do.
You got the point, even though these extensions themselves aren't multithreaded, it's their function that matters.
Well, it's more about function than size, but usually less than 200 KB.
A few examples from my system:
BossKey - virtual desktops, very basic implementation
Deliminator - removes the wait when you try to delete a locked file by hacking system dlls
pixie - color picker
nrg2iso - converter
UPXUnpack v1 - unpacker
ForceDel - deletes stubborn files
Slower - slows down applications
RegShot - detects registry changes
TCMenu - lets you have menu under a button in Total Commander
Taskix - rearranges taskbar items
trid - file identifier
GSAR - search and replace in files
HDHacker - low level HDD access
Revelation - password revealer
TweakUI
babyftp - FTP server
KL-Detector - Key logger detector
cports - lists open ports
apt - kills applications that want to live
StartUpLite - removes useless startup entries
RegASSASSIN - like ForceDel, but for registry
Stripper - reduced PNG size
HTMLShrinkerLight - removes unnecessary characters from HTML code
TiDy - HTML cleaner / formatter
CLCL - clipboard manager
CamStudio - desktop recorder
RootkitRevealer - hunts rootkits
shexview - lists shell extensions
PrcView - Task manager
DShutdown - shutdown manager
PEiD - executable idetifier
AVImedic - heals corrupted .avis
I could add many more, I guess that they are all single threaded except ForceDel (though it's not that it needs a lot of computing power) and (unlikely) CamStudio + RootkitRevealer
OK, here you found something too. They are no match for Winamp in terms of popularity and neither is a manager, but at least it is something.
I meant programs that you use to manage your system. I mentioned some in the "simple tools", but you could add i.e. defragmenter or regedit fit here too.
You're repeating yourself.
Do you really find that list to be comprehensive enough to judge one's computer skills by counting number of programs from it that the person uses?
It is the most commonly used spreadsheet, and the one that generates the most overhead. However, in my work environment I typically have at least 2-3 of the apps open, so multithreaded or not, the extra horsepower is noticeable in multitasking.
Flash is the most common multimedia object imbedded in web apps on the web... post a Youtube video, you will post flash.Flash is not internet, but multimedia program. No browser, email client, IM, downloader I know of is multithreaded.
Haven't researched it, I don't use desktop management software myself other than remote desktop for other systems.I seriusly doubt that more than 1% of them is multithreaded. Actually I don't know even one...and it seems neither you do.
many other extensions run in the background, which are nothing more than a bunch of single threads... again, benefiting from extra cores. There are applications for extensions that do benefit and exists http://www.ssware.com/You got the point, even though these extensions themselves aren't multithreaded, it's their function that matters.
Interesting, a list of crap that nobody really uses except downloaded from shareware sites... some are useful i suppose, embedded with adware no doubt.Well, it's more about function than size, but usually less than 200 KB.
A few examples from my system:
BossKey - virtual desktops, very basic implementation
Deliminator - removes the wait when you try to delete a locked file by hacking system dlls
pixie - color picker
nrg2iso - converter
UPXUnpack v1 - unpacker
ForceDel - deletes stubborn file
Winamp does not utilize it's own codecs ... but if you do play various files through this app it will call the multithreaded codecs you must install to use it.OK, here you found something too. They are no match for Winamp in terms of popularity and neither is a manager, but at least it is something.
Quicktime is mutlithreaded, as is sonic cinepak codecs from Roxio, as is the intervideo codecs, etc. etc. though Winamp does not support these, it does use Lame for encoding (which has MT variants you can use), hell even Windows media encoder is multithreaded.
Just checked, windows defragger spawns 7 threads doing one drive, windows desktop manager spawns 8, IE has 37 threads ... of course not all active, but you get the jist.I meant programs that you use to manage your system. I mentioned some in the "simple tools", but you could add i.e. defragmenter or regedit fit here too.
The point is, overall, the amount of multithreaded code today is much more available in most all the common usage scenarios that it makes quads viable.
Of course I am, data is data you obviously did not spend any time researching your thesis.You're repeating yourself.
I have 3 quads going 100% 24x7.
Yes. Look, if you are not a power user and simply email, surf the web, and use little shut down applet shell extensions, you don't even need a dual core... go get a Via Nano or Atom based system it will do all you need.Do you really find that list to be comprehensive enough to judge one's computer skills by counting number of programs from it that the person uses?
Last edited by JumpingJack; 08-29-2008 at 12:19 PM.
One hundred years from now It won't matter
What kind of car I drove What kind of house I lived in
How much money I had in the bank Nor what my cloths looked like.... But The world may be a little better Because, I was important In the life of a child.
-- from "Within My Power" by Forest Witcraft
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks