[08:55] <ripps> I have a dilema: intel i3 2100 or amd athlon x4.
[08:56] <ripps> sandybridge with 2 cores vs. athlon with 4. Sandybridge is suppose to have awesome performance, but does it trump an extra 2 cores
[09:05] <ripps> I've looked at some comparison benchmarks, but it they seem pretty comparable, except each one does better a certain operation than the other.
[14:19] <mikeputnam> ripps: intel i7!
[14:22] <KBme> well, i'd guess it depends on how parallelisable is what you'r doing
[14:22] <KBme> you're
[14:22] <KBme> if it can be parallelised easily more cores will help more
[14:23] <mikeputnam> so do "cores" present themselves as disticnt cpus to the os?
[14:24] <mikeputnam> s/disticnt/distinct/
[14:24] <spikeb> yes
[14:24] <mikeputnam> ah
[14:25] <mikeputnam> so a dual processor with dual cores would appear to have 4 cpus
[14:25] <mikeputnam> got it
[14:27] <KBme> also intel Hyper Threading makes cores show up as two cores
[14:27] <mikeputnam> as a non-os programmer, i wonder how linux itself uses or does not use parallelism with regard to cpus
[14:28] <mikeputnam> KBme: i see.  didn't realize that either
[14:28] <KBme> how it uses?
[14:28] <KBme> it has a scheduler to map OS level threads to cores
[14:28] <mikeputnam> so in my earlier example the 2 proc dual core may look like 8 cpus?
[14:29] <KBme> if it has hyper threading yes, each core shows up as two cpus
[14:29] <mikeputnam> crazy
[14:29] <KBme> what i understood about hyper threading is that if the process runs into a bottleneck it can be rescheduled and an other process can take over
[14:30] <KBme> but don't take my word on that one, we're getting on the murky water of CPU design
[14:30] <mikeputnam> heh
[14:31] <mikeputnam> so even if an application isn't designed for parallelism, it probably would benefit in someways with the os balancing it's own threads across cpus
[14:32] <KBme> well
[14:32] <KBme> the whole system still benefits for it
[14:32] <mikeputnam> right
[14:32] <KBme> your application won't
[14:32] <mikeputnam> so indirectly in my example themn
[14:32] <mikeputnam> *then
[14:32] <mikeputnam> ah
[14:32] <KBme> yeah
[14:33] <KBme> well, since it can fully use one core and the "other stuff" can be mapped to other cores
[14:33] <mikeputnam> so generally speaking without actively designing for parallelism, your app exists as a single thread (pid?)
[14:33] <KBme> it will get more cpu time than if the whole system is on the same core
[14:33] <mikeputnam> right
[14:33] <KBme> well, that depends too
[14:33] <KBme> you can thread your program and still not be parallel
[14:33] <mikeputnam> overall timeshare, but the os isn't going to magically separate out chunks of your app to leverage idle cpu cycles
[14:33] <KBme> look up for example the difference between concurrency and parallelism
[14:34] <KBme> no, it won't ☺
[14:34] <KBme> though the haskell people are working on that :D
[14:35] <mikeputnam> it's interesting to think about concurrency and parallelism out of the context of computing
[14:35] <mikeputnam> like a manufacturing business for example
[14:35] <mikeputnam> get more orders -> get more people -> do more work
[14:36] <KBme> yeah
[14:36] <KBme> io bottleneck: an unfinished highway
[14:36] <mikeputnam> heh
[14:37] <KBme> mikeputnam, dhmn looks interesting :P
[14:37] <mikeputnam> or even open source software development. i believe human brains are basically single threaded. but get 15 people...   :)
[14:38] <mikeputnam> KBme: it is. clever people doing fun and interesting stuff
[14:38] <mikeputnam> KBme: join the mailing list.  lots of neat stuff goes by
[14:38] <KBme> mikeputnam, you are very wrong about the human brain
[14:39] <mikeputnam> yes i suppose. there's a lot going on: keep my breathing, seeing, hearing, fight or flight, etc etc
[14:40] <KBme> yep
[14:40] <KBme> also, if you're really interested, search for "Google Workshop on Quantum Biology" in youtube, pretty mind-boggling talks
[14:40] <mikeputnam> i guess i was referring to the voluntary thought->action process
[14:40] <KBme> that "counscious" part...hmm yeah, maybe
[14:40] <KBme> i wouldn't be sure, tho, even
[14:41] <mikeputnam> at least i know i can't write 3 programs in parallel
[14:41] <KBme> heh
[14:41] <KBme> mikeputnam, i'm in france for now ☺
[14:43] <mikeputnam> neat. seek out "hackerspace"s near your locality. you'll be glad you did.
[14:43] <mikeputnam> http://hackerspaces.org/wiki/France
[14:44] <KBme> there seem to be non where I am..
[14:44] <mikeputnam> :/
[14:45] <mikeputnam> start one?
[14:45] <mikeputnam> :)
[14:45] <KBme> so, what is it?
[14:45] <KBme> hmmm
[14:45] <KBme> i guess i'll just rtfm ;)
[14:46] <KBme> mikeputnam, we're kind of starting one
[14:47] <mikeputnam> great!
[14:47] <mikeputnam> sort of a community workshop
[14:47] <KBme> for hackers
[14:47] <KBme> yeah
[14:47] <mikeputnam> like a health club membership, but for your brain
[14:48] <KBme> so what do you program, mikeputnam?
[14:48] <mikeputnam> computer people, metalworking people, woodworking people, crafty people, electronics people, art people, etc, etc
[14:48] <mikeputnam> i work on an Oracle/PeopleSoft ERP app
[14:49] <KBme> ☺
[14:49] <KBme> ugg (oracle;)
[14:49] <mikeputnam> yeah
[14:49] <KBme> they do usually pay well tho
[14:50] <KBme> well, ogtta get back to hacking on my couchapp laterz
[14:51] <mikeputnam> enjoy