I wasn't really intending to get in to an argument about whether rustc threads well, because although I've used Rust a fair bit I haven't built any large projects in it. If people have and it uses all their cores, I totally believe them.
What I was trying to do is point out that the correct response to "Rust doesn't thread well" is not "but have you run it on a workstation?". Laptop chips for the first time are extremely competitive for single threaded workloads, because the individual cores in large chips now have equivalent power budgets, you just get a bunch more of them.
"Actually, it does thread well" is totally fine as a response, and I'm not going to claim otherwise.
Compiling multiple crates at the same time is very common in my project.
There will definitely be workloads that benefit from the new cache hierarchy, but there are also those that suffer.
If you've measured it on a high end laptop for comparison then, of course, the proof is in the pudding and I'm not going to argue (or if you see >~10 threads in use that's proof enough).
What desktop are you comparing to what laptop? The top end i9 has eight cores, and a max turbo just 100mhz shy of the top end desktop part. The turbo is less aggressive on the laptop, but there's just not that much difference between them for low thread counts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i9_micropro...