Forum > Windows
V8 Optimized App
Jason G:
Oh one more thing, Some users over on NC forum are reporting that SSE3 builds seem to be quicker than the SSSE3 builds at the moment on a core2 based setup. Can't verify that myself, or figure how a Cloverdale rig fits into that equation. Something strange there....
RottenMutt:
--- Quote from: RottenMutt on 26 Oct 2007, 01:54:47 pm ---well i replaced the board with an X7DA3+ last night. i do not believe the seti performance has increased.
--- End quote ---
I'm starting to forum the opinion that nothing is wrong the the computer/mobo and that the difference between the "Darwin" machines and the the Windows machines are just the app and the Mac app preforms much better on V8's then the optimised apps on windows.:(
Gecko_R7:
--- Quote from: RottenMutt on 29 Nov 2007, 09:50:31 am ---
--- Quote from: RottenMutt on 26 Oct 2007, 01:54:47 pm ---well i replaced the board with an X7DA3+ last night. i do not believe the seti performance has increased.
--- End quote ---
I'm starting to forum the opinion that nothing is wrong the the computer/mobo and that the difference between the "Darwin" machines and the the Windows machines are just the app and the Mac app preforms much better on V8's then the optimised apps on windows.:(
--- End quote ---
There is a very substantial performance difference of @ 30% to as much as 50% depending on the AR, if you compare OSX V8 and 2.4V on similar platforms. Hardware is largely not responsible for this. The aps are really 2 different animals that have different lineages and developer approaches.
Something else to keep in mind is that for Mac, there are really only three Intel flavors required....Core Duo, Core 2 and Xeon. Alex still does G4 and G5 PPC ports as well, but this is really legacy support. For x86, developers have to accommodate MANY different CPU & OS combos and generations of same. This means some consideration has to be given on what development combos will work on the the widest range of the above. Also, it takes considerable time and effort to alpha and beta build & test for all these different combos...time that could otherwise be re-invested into trying new things for additional incremental improvement. The x86 aps also are the result of collaborative work and pieces involving MANY people over the past few years. People come, and people go. As Jason (j_groothu) can attest, if a new developer has ideas to add/improve the code base, it takes a little while to understand and figure out how the current code is structured & works before one can start down the path of optimizing for it. It's rather like an architect trying to contribute to a house built in stages by 10 other architects, each with their own specialty and style. The OSX ap has essentially had 1 main architect the past couple of years who prior to Mactel conversion, was the only active person building PPC aps. PPC code development requirements were substantially different than X86 considerations..i.e. compilers, libraries, cpu architecture etc. yet many concepts/elements from this port quite well to current x86 Mactels and in some cases, work much better with Intel's development tools.
All these things add-up over time and result in the different lineages we have today ;)
In any case, the current aps for all platforms are the quickest ever and testament to the fantastic efforts and dedication of all our developers, past and present. ;D
Cheers!
Jason G:
--- Quote from: Gecko_R7 on 29 Nov 2007, 12:08:53 pm ---..
As Jason (j_groothu) can attest, if a new developer has ideas to add/improve the code base, it takes a little while to understand and figure out how the current code is structured & works before one can start down the path of optimizing for it. It's rather like an architect trying to contribute to a house built in stages by 10 other architects, each with their own specialty and style.
..
--- End quote ---
I certainly can attest to that! Frankenstein's Monster might be another good analogy ;D , I'm somewhere between figuring out how it's structured and how it works.
For the situation with different Hardware/OS/Compilers I like simple car analogies:
- If you are designing a new turbocharger for a specific vehicle it can be highly 'tweaked' for that car / engine, you have a fixed 'platform' to design for.
- If you want a more generic model then it may still be good, but will have compromises involved in the design, maybe size, shape, maybe bolt patterns, capacity, all additional considerations for turbocharger designer.you have a more loosely defined or even shifting platform.
Jason
RottenMutt:
Here is my latest RAC Graph, the computer crunches 24/7 except when i'm playing Crysis.
[attachment deleted by admin]
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version