Post 9vYHeqo7SqWzq0Utou by skunksarebetter@fosstodon.org
(DIR) More posts by skunksarebetter@fosstodon.org
(DIR) Post #9vSNRNmQqukGnpijlw by brejoc@fosstodon.org
2020-05-26T20:58:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
Today I read an article about a new “small” computer that comes with a CPU with 10 cores. Moore’s law couldn’t be more dead. If your favourite language has bad or no concurrency, then it’s dying too. Maybe not immediately, but it’s already starting to decompose a little bit.
(DIR) Post #9vSNRO49n0vJgo0tOq by skunksarebetter@fosstodon.org
2020-05-27T01:36:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@brejoc How is Moore's law dead? By this account it would mean it's alive, since Moore's law regards transistor count not single core speed.
(DIR) Post #9vT6yohoGFTdnusKW0 by brejoc@fosstodon.org
2020-05-27T10:07:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skunksarebetter I'd argue that just using more cores that take up more space is not in the spirit of Moore's prediction. Of course this is up to interpretation since years now. But since we are talking about multi core CPU's, we'd also have to talk about Amdahl's law. How good are more transistors, if you can't leverage them with the same efficiency?
(DIR) Post #9vUOJwZC7bvie2Suky by skunksarebetter@fosstodon.org
2020-05-28T00:56:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@brejoc Moore's law wasn't targeted at CPUs specifically, it was a general observance of ICs as a whole. Whether a die has one element, two elements, or 4000 elements isn't relevant, all that matters with Moore's law is transistor count. Moore's law applies as much to solid state memory (millions of pages) as it does to GPUs (hundreds of cores) as it does to CMOS sensors (millions of pixels) as it does to CPUs (tens of cores). Moore's law states decreasing size, not increasing performance.
(DIR) Post #9vW4BpvrIM5Yz6qKZM by brejoc@fosstodon.org
2020-05-28T20:19:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skunksarebetter Not CPU specific, but they are included. Especially in the last 20 years when Intel spoke about it. The curve is flattening and right now it looks like this isn’t changing for CPUs. Especially CPU power dissipation is a problem - a problem that isn’t only eating physical space but also performance. And due to that problem, we cannot rely on automagical performance gains. We need to switch to languages with good concurrency.
(DIR) Post #9vWkhO12oq2BkFzloW by skunksarebetter@fosstodon.org
2020-05-29T04:16:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@brejoc My point was Moore's law is for manufacturing density, not for performance.Concurrent does not always mean fast. A lot of programs have little benefit from concurrency other than asynchronicity. For big data and stuff where it is actually useful concurrency is indeed powerful.A language for concurrency can be very bad for other things. This is why we have so many languages. Keep in mind not every computer has 8+ cores and 8+ GB RAM, microcontrollers and industrial automation exists.
(DIR) Post #9vWkii1vtLT46l2daC by skunksarebetter@fosstodon.org
2020-05-29T04:16:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@brejoc Also why do we need automagical performance gains? Are there really things that the average programmer makes that necessitate the CPU time that a 10 core processor can provide? I understand large scale operations and very intensive things but most computers are going to be running a web browser and spreadsheets in the end.
(DIR) Post #9vWn4aGrcXCKK3aGTg by tomosaigon@fosstodon.org
2020-05-29T04:42:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skunksarebetter @brejoc we need performance gains to run JavaScript in browsers 🤣
(DIR) Post #9vXNUhFwXxGUB6PKOe by brejoc@fosstodon.org
2020-05-29T11:30:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skunksarebetter I get what you mean. But the declined performance gains are a direct result of the measures that are taken to tackle the physical limitations they are running into. Not blaming anyone. But we have to adjust to this.
(DIR) Post #9vXNrNU4E1z1W3pSc4 by brejoc@fosstodon.org
2020-05-29T11:35:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skunksarebetter I think you are underestimating the performance needs of web browsers and spreadsheet applications nowadays. 😉
(DIR) Post #9vYHeqPevmxuc93Mh6 by brejoc@fosstodon.org
2020-05-29T11:33:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skunksarebetter Btw, also the embedded device area will soon be dominated by multi core machines. It's just a matter of time.
(DIR) Post #9vYHeqo7SqWzq0Utou by skunksarebetter@fosstodon.org
2020-05-29T21:59:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@brejoc While embedded will become way more powerful in the future there will be the need for low power single core development for quite a while. The idea of a 3 cent chip that can be programmed is all too appealing to a lot of people.I think that concurrency definitely can and should be implemented better. IMO even good concurrent languages don't do it well because humans are bad at concurrency.Also my Electron powered NodeJS spreadsheet based Mastodon client just froze, give me a second…
(DIR) Post #9w8vhQPdRR0CMtZxMe by 361.xj9@social.sunshinegardens.org
2020-06-16T14:18:33.464897Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@brejoc @skunksarebetter bloat grows to fill the available resources ;-;