 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
No way to put a picture into the Bug-Report area. I'll put it in here and use
the link.
Here the Thread:
http://news.povray.org/povray.bugreports/thread/%3Cweb.4fc41d4a403c23aca3bfeb720%40news.povray.org%3E/
Rgds,
Holger
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'half_cpus.jpg' (203 KB)
Preview of image 'half_cpus.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Showoff.
Though it, and even my own 8-effective-CPU computer show a significant
problem with the interface of Task Manager's Performance tab: just
squishing more and more graphs into the space horizontally results in a
pretty well useless display. They should break it into several rows as
well.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Though it, and even my own 8-effective-CPU computer show a significant
> problem with the interface of Task Manager's Performance tab: just
> squishing more and more graphs into the space horizontally results in a
> pretty well useless display. They should break it into several rows as
> well.
A more significant problem shows up with my quad-core system. As you
know, it has 4 execution cores. But it also has hyperthreading, which
makes Windows pretend that it has 8 cores. But it doesn't. Which means
that even when all 4 cores are working at maximum capacity, Task Manager
claims I'm only using 50% CPU. This is terribly misleading...
(OTOH, Windows doesn't track how much CPU power is /really/ being used,
because there would be way too much overhead.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 07.06.2012 07:18, schrieb Tim Cook:
> Showoff.
>
> Though it, and even my own 8-effective-CPU computer show a significant
> problem with the interface of Task Manager's Performance tab: just
> squishing more and more graphs into the space horizontally results in a
> pretty well useless display. They should break it into several rows as
> well.
You need to get a larger display :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 07.06.2012 09:54, schrieb Invisible:
> A more significant problem shows up with my quad-core system. As you
> know, it has 4 execution cores. But it also has hyperthreading, which
> makes Windows pretend that it has 8 cores. But it doesn't. Which means
> that even when all 4 cores are working at maximum capacity, Task Manager
> claims I'm only using 50% CPU. This is terribly misleading...
Claiming that it uses 100% CPU would be misleading as well. After all,
hyperthreading /does/ add some speed benefit; it pretty much depends on
your application how much that benefit is: The more cache misses the
software generates, the higher the HT benefit.
Even technically, HT indeed extends each core by another "half a core".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 07/06/2012 12:17 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 07.06.2012 09:54, schrieb Invisible:
>
>> A more significant problem shows up with my quad-core system. As you
>> know, it has 4 execution cores. But it also has hyperthreading, which
>> makes Windows pretend that it has 8 cores. But it doesn't. Which means
>> that even when all 4 cores are working at maximum capacity, Task Manager
>> claims I'm only using 50% CPU. This is terribly misleading...
>
> Claiming that it uses 100% CPU would be misleading as well. After all,
> hyperthreading /does/ add some speed benefit; it pretty much depends on
> your application how much that benefit is
And that, right there, is the problem. It would be prohibitively
expensive to actually /measure/ how much of the available compute
resources you're really using. So you have to guess.
Personally, I think I'd go for reporting all 4 cores running a single
thread as "100%", and then if hyperthreading kicks in, you go above
100%. My CPU goes up to 11! :-D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Though it, and even my own 8-effective-CPU computer show a significant
>> problem with the interface of Task Manager's Performance tab: just
>> squishing more and more graphs into the space horizontally results in a
>> pretty well useless display. They should break it into several rows as
>> well.
>
> You need to get a larger display :-P
http://cdn.overclock.net/8/8e/8eca552d_64Core2TBTaskManager_58CD8842.png
Looks like multiple rows to me...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 07.06.2012 13:30, schrieb Invisible:
> http://cdn.overclock.net/8/8e/8eca552d_64Core2TBTaskManager_58CD8842.png
>
> Looks like multiple rows to me...
Hell's bells! Now /that/ looks like a machine I'd love to use for
rendering :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> http://cdn.overclock.net/8/8e/8eca552d_64Core2TBTaskManager_58CD8842.png
>>
>> Looks like multiple rows to me...
>
> Hell's bells! Now /that/ looks like a machine I'd love to use for
> rendering :-P
56 cores? Pffft. My GPU has 196 cores... ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 07.06.2012 13:56, schrieb Invisible:
>>> http://cdn.overclock.net/8/8e/8eca552d_64Core2TBTaskManager_58CD8842.png
>>>
>>> Looks like multiple rows to me...
>>
>> Hell's bells! Now /that/ looks like a machine I'd love to use for
>> rendering :-P
>
> 56 cores? Pffft. My GPU has 196 cores... ;-)
>
Yeah, but can it run POV-Ray? :-P
Besides, just think of the scene complexity and radiosity quality you
can achieve with 2 TB of main memory...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
