/comp/ - Computers (textboard)

[8 / 0 / ?]

[1376605779] most cores or more processors ?

frp31 Fri 16 Aug 2013 02:29:00 No.86199 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By:

Hi,
Is it more interresting to have one processor 4 cores, or tow physical processor having each one 2 cores ?

I guess second solution is better due to bus access... but processors in PC wast 99% of its time to do a NOP operation (do nothing) so ....

what s the best then ...

1 processor with 4 cores
2 processor with 2 cores
4 processors mono-core

thx

Anonymous

2

Anonymous Sat 17 Aug 2013 01:01:00 No.86204 Report

Quoted By:

More processors means more power consumption. More cores doesn't necessarily more power consumption. At least, not in the amount of an extra processor. There are motherboards out there that can intelligently switch between processors in a multi-processor setup, but for regular consumer's use, that's way too much to pay for as they are more expensive than single multi-core processor setup.

Then again, I've seen a desktop setup a while ago with two double-processor motherboards, each holding an Intel i3 (like, the cheapest) and it outperformed a "top-line" i7 by 3-4x or so, for half the price of the setup. Used more power though...

3

TJ Mon 19 Aug 2013 00:17:00 No.86213 Report

Quoted By:

Pro/Cons assuming similar architectures and per-core to per CPU performance.

Core Based CPU:
Pros: Coherent shared L2,L3 caches, better for thread-based loads, better power-efficiency, better space utilization (1 heatsink, etc, 1 system bus)
Cons: Usually less total cache; less beneficial to processe-based loads. Sleep-power leakage when one or more cores are in sleep but shared L2/L3 caches may reduce power savings.

Multiple CPU:
Pros: Usually more total but separate L2/L3 caches. Better for process based loads. Lower sleep-power leakage by sleeping entire processor.
Cons: Usually higher cost in materials and size. Usually much higher total power usage. L2 and L3 caches are not shared between processor meaning threads may have to transfer data across CPU interlink or even system bus to make data available to other CPU.

IMO: Multple CPU is best for running more distinct applications that do not communicate or share data. For example, hosting server with multiple XEN/VPS clients. Partition is more efficient.
Multiple Cores is the best solution for threaded-environments and typical workstation and dedicated server usage. Cost is also usually lower, materials savings.
Despite all that, neither choice is particularly bad even in worst case scenarios except in the most niche compute scenarios.

ㄣɔʇ™ !3lWjo8kf8k

4

ㄣɔʇ™ !3lWjo8kf8k Tue 20 Aug 2013 02:00:00 No.86215 Report

Quoted By:

be there cache

④ⓒⓣ™

5

④ⓒⓣ™ Tue 20 Aug 2013 17:30:00 No.86218 Report

Quoted By:

and I saw it was good

Anonymous

6

Anonymous Wed 21 Aug 2013 23:32:00 No.86225 Report

Quoted By:

>>5
>>4
>>5
Still copyfagging i see SFBE!

Anonymous

7

Anonymous Sat 24 Aug 2013 20:46:00 No.86235 Report

Quoted By:

>>2
where

Anonymous

8

Anonymous Mon 26 Aug 2013 03:36:00 No.86238 Report

Quoted By:

>>6
You do know that >>4 is the real 4ct and not SFBE fakenamefagging!

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

[1376605779] most cores or more processors ?