Re:Power9 Benchmarks vs. Intel Xeon vs. AMD EPYC Performance...
by lultimouomo on Friday April 13, 2018 @11:26AM
(#16830861)
You don't need CPU threads for threads that don't need CPU...
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Power9 Benchmarks vs. Intel Xeon vs. AMD EPYC Performance...
by sp332 on Friday April 13, 2018 @11:41AM
(#16831046)
The 8-core version only has 8 (each) ALUs, LSUs, and vector units. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POWER9#Core If each core has 4 threads "running" on it, some of them are not going to be executing.
Re:Power9 Benchmarks vs. Intel Xeon vs. AMD EPYC Performance...
by Joky on Friday April 13, 2018 @12:02PM
(#16831255)
Still: the kernel won’t schedule threads that are waiting on I/O i believe.
Re:Power9 Benchmarks vs. Intel Xeon vs. AMD EPYC Performance...
by sp332 on Friday April 13, 2018 @12:18PM
(#16831421)
Ok that's an interesting point. So they'd have to be waiting on a fetch instruction for the time not to be totally wasted?
Re:Power9 Benchmarks vs. Intel Xeon vs. AMD EPYC Performance...
by blattimwind on Friday April 13, 2018 @01:13PM
(#16831909)
Blocked tasks are not scheduled until unblocked.