Re: ISBoxer 2 Alpha
lax wrote:Here is a chart that should probably help you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_second#Timeline_of_instructions_per_second; it gives both "D IPS / clock cycles per second" and "D IPS / clock cycles per second / Cores per die". It INCLUDES the #1 supercomputer from your list, along with desktop CPUs and such. Note the correlation between the two columns; the number on the left is the number on the right times the number of cores (except in a couple of cases, but the point remains).
Unfortunately, this doesn't help me. I was looking for something which shows the information in a very clear X MHz + X MHz = 2X MHz (in terms of adding MHz from different cores together), or Y Application gets X% of total MHz and only X% (in terms of spreading out MHz).
I can show anyone that 4 + 4 = 8, but what I'm having a difficult time grasping is that 4GHz of one core can be added to 4GHz of another core to make 8GHz for use on any given process, and from what I understand this is what you'd be telling people in the Wizard by showing them MHz next to each Slot. My understanding has always been that the program in question needs to be specifically coded with the intention of using multiple cores (you mentioned this before), but even then it splits up its set(s) of instructions between different cores to be completed. This doesn't mean that these instructions are being completed at 8GHz, it just means that two different sets of instructions are being completed at 4GHz each (assuming we're seeing perfect 100% utilization).
lax wrote:how do you expect the normal, everyday user to feel when they see those numbers? What will they gain by seeing those numbers?
When I show the user that I expect their game instances to each have 50Hz of power available, I expect them to understand it will probably run like shit and not because I'm making up "this is probably going to run like shit" but because there is actual numbers.
Okay, here is my final list of problems with showing raw MHz numbers (besides the fact that I still don't believe it to be broken down this way) and why I feel that the information is very misleading:
1) Does a program exist which will allow someone to assign a set amount of MHz to a specific process? If not, then how can the Wizard show the user how many MHz they can expect a specific game client to receive?
2) AMD MHz is different than Intel MHz, as well as each generation of CPU architecture of the same manufacturer having a "different level" of MHz. However, 350 HP in a 2014 Dodge Charger is the same as 350 HP in a 2014 Ford Mustang, just like 350 HP is still the same 350 HP in a 1969 Chevy Camaro.
3) If MHz can be added together in the way which has been previously mentioned, then why don't Intel and AMD market their multi-core processors as such? Wouldn't it be worthwhile for Intel to market their newest 5960X as having a base frequency of 24GHz (8 cores * 3GHz) and a turbo frequency of 28GHz (8 cores * 3.5GHz)? However, this has never been done in the history of marketing processors, as far as I know.
4) We've already established that there are several other factors (GPU, I/O, background processes, etc.) which need to be known in order to estimate overall performance. Someone is going to see an amount of MHz next to the Slot (or however it's going to be shown), and they could easily end up with the idea that as long as the number is high, then they're okay.
Let me break this same idea down with yet another example:
In the table above, the user will be under the impression that 500MHz is enough to run the game client at 60 FPS, but in the table below...
- Code:
+--------+------+-----+
| MHz | Slot | FPS |
+--------+------+-----+
| 500MHz | 1 | 60 |
| 500MHz | 2 | 60 |
| 500MHz | 3 | 60 |
| 500MHz | 4 | 60 |
+--------+------+-----+
GPU usage is still below 100%, but CPU usage is pegged at 100%. Gameplay is stuttering with some random client crashing from time to time.
...they come to find out that it isn't. So, what exactly is MHz telling the user in this situation? Nothing. Ultimately, they should be learning that 2GHz isn't enough to output a total of 240 FPS across four game clients, but I don't see how they can gather that information from seeing Slot-specific MHz when the first table provided misleading information.
bob wrote:Speak for yourself . I understand the idea, and even why, and even the how of the Mhz Madness
Then someone needs to link to something that makes sense in normal everyday computing that a normal person can understand, because that's what, and who, we're dealing with here. You've both learned this information from somewhere, and someone needs to provide some cut-and-dry documentation on how X MHz + X MHz = 2X MHz, and how we're allowed to just ignore cores and caches and what not. I guess I'm the idiot here because I've never heard of anything like this.
At this point, I'm done, and I firmly believe that no good can come from showing raw MHz numbers to the end user, and, if anything, is only going to lead to confusion.