To: ShadowAce
You add 48 cores and whaddaya get??
another day older and a blue screen of death
Saint Peter don’tcha call me ‘Cause-
I can’t go... my operating system has done hit a wall.
3 posted on
10/01/2010 8:23:11 AM PDT by
ClearCase_guy
(Things will change after the revolution, but not before.)
To: ClearCase_guy
48 cores? I still haven’t found any games, software, or applications I want that will use 4 cores fully.
5 posted on
10/01/2010 8:25:53 AM PDT by
Wooly
To: ClearCase_guy
48 cores? I still haven’t found any games, software, or applications I want that will use 4 cores fully.
6 posted on
10/01/2010 8:25:59 AM PDT by
Wooly
To: ClearCase_guy
It's interesting, because I've seen Linux run on clusters containing hundreds of cores. As I added cores to the job(s), they kept getting faster and faster.
The difference, of course, is that the cores were on separate machines, and separate CPUs. Each CPU had up to 4 cores.
Either redesign the CPUs memory management, or redesign the OS, I guess.
7 posted on
10/01/2010 8:27:02 AM PDT by
ShadowAce
(Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
To: ClearCase_guy
8 posted on
10/01/2010 8:37:43 AM PDT by
Still Thinking
(Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
To: ClearCase_guy
LOL! Ain't it the truth. I could see the utility of 48 cores given I'm running hosts with 20 virtual boxen apiece, but whadamigonnado wid 48 cores on a laptop?
Oh. Pr0n. Never mind.
To: ClearCase_guy
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
