Board index » cppbuilder » dual proc any good?

dual proc any good?


2005-06-18 02:18:03 AM
cppbuilder11
Hey all,
Posted something similar at documentation, but got told this is a better
place.
I need to upgrade my hardware, and was wondering whether the bcb
compiler/linker would make proper use of a machine with dual processors. Or
whether getting an Intel extreme would be better.
What is the most effective solution here?
Thanks,
Tharun
 
 

Re:dual proc any good?

"Tharun Pillay" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
Hey all,

Posted something similar at documentation, but got told this is a
better place.

I need to upgrade my hardware, and was wondering whether the bcb
compiler/linker would make proper use of a machine with dual
processors. Or whether getting an Intel extreme would be better.

What is the most effective solution here?
I would think that, until BCB's compiler compiles several files at the
same time, then a faster single chip would be better than two slower
ones. That said, having two chips would ease the load on the single
chip, possibly increasing compile speed.
However, I suspect that the speed of your hard drives is a critical
component in determining compile speed. I would suggest going with 2
or more SATA hdd's raided together. Possibly, 4 hdd's with a 0 / 5
raid array for best speed and recovery.
Jonathan
 

Re:dual proc any good?

Hey Jonathan,
I don't know how much hard drive comes into play here - I'm using a Seagate
Cheetah 10krpm SCSI disk. Performance monitor reports that on average during
compilation I'm writing around 2MB/s... if that. The disk's capable of far
more than that. : )
Yes, I guess you're right though about having more, slower procs. I read
something somewhere about writing a "make" program (I think it may have been
in this group), that would compile multiple files at the same time then link
them and generate the .exe. Sounds like a mission of note. Would be nice if
Borland could let us have something like that... or at least some pointers
on how to do it. (Hint hint TeamB).
So yeah. Maybe a single 3.6 or something would do the trick. With as much
cache as possible.....
.T
"Jonathan Benedicto" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
"Tharun Pillay" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...
>Hey all,
>
>Posted something similar at documentation, but got told this is a better
>place.
>
>I need to upgrade my hardware, and was wondering whether the bcb
>compiler/linker would make proper use of a machine with dual processors.
>Or whether getting an Intel extreme would be better.
>
>What is the most effective solution here?

I would think that, until BCB's compiler compiles several files at the
same time, then a faster single chip would be better than two slower ones.
That said, having two chips would ease the load on the single chip,
possibly increasing compile speed.

However, I suspect that the speed of your hard drives is a critical
component in determining compile speed. I would suggest going with 2 or
more SATA hdd's raided together. Possibly, 4 hdd's with a 0 / 5 raid array
for best speed and recovery.

Jonathan

 

{smallsort}

Re:dual proc any good?

"Tharun Pillay" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
Quote
I don't know how much hard drive comes into play here - I'm using a
Seagate Cheetah 10krpm SCSI disk. Performance monitor reports that
on average during compilation I'm writing around 2MB/s... if that.
The disk's capable of far more than that. : )
AKAIK, a SATA would be better than a SCSI because SATA's can seek
faster. And with lots of file opens / closes in a compile, the SATA
would probably outperform the SCSI.
Quote
Yes, I guess you're right though about having more, slower procs. I
read something somewhere about writing a "make" program (I think it
may have been in this group), that would compile multiple files at
the same time then link them and generate the .exe. Sounds like a
mission of note. Would be nice if Borland could let us have
something like that... or at least some pointers on how to do it.
(Hint hint TeamB).
Do you want to take it on ? <g>
Quote
So yeah. Maybe a single 3.6 or something would do the trick. With as
much cache as possible.....
Something big, and yes I would want lots of cache.
Jonathan
 

Re:dual proc any good?

"Tharun Pillay" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
Quote
I need to upgrade my hardware, and was wondering whether the bcb
compiler/linker would make proper use of a machine with dual processors. Or
whether getting an Intel extreme would be better.
Are you wanting your resulting application to use multiple processors,
or are you wanting the compiler to do simultaneous multiple file
compilation? AFAIK, BCB does not do parallel builds.
However, BCB can produce applications that use multiple processors, if
your program uses multiple threads.
--
Chris (TeamB);
 

Re:dual proc any good?

Jonathan Benedicto wrote:
Quote

AKAIK, a SATA would be better than a SCSI because SATA's can seek
faster. And with lots of file opens / closes in a compile, the SATA
would probably outperform the SCSI.

Seek time is an individual drive issue. My 15,000RPM SCSI drives have an average seek time of
4.5ms. Also SCSI drives do not require the babysitting of the CPU that ATA drives do. The system
asks for the information - the SCSI drive can "disconnect", acquire the data, reconnect and
transfer it. The command queuing can also aid quite a bit in acquiring data faster. While some of
these capabilities are in the ATA command spec, most don't support it well. This is also why SCSI
drives are still more expensive than ATA.
All that said, memory is still the biggest key because more RAM will allow Windows to cache more
data.
In my case, I use a RAM drive for my intermediate directory. Advantage: quick access -
disadvantage: I must rebuild all .obj files when I begin working on a project.
--
-Michael Gillen
 

Re:dual proc any good?

so I guess this is true: if I program a mult-thread application (using the
TThread objects) i have nothing to do else and my application would running
on a dual CPU PC using both of the CPU's?
thank you for a answer!
roger
"Chris Uzdavinis (TeamB)" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >schrieb im Newsbeitrag
Quote
"Tharun Pillay" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:

>I need to upgrade my hardware, and was wondering whether the bcb
>compiler/linker would make proper use of a machine with dual processors.
>Or
>whether getting an Intel extreme would be better.

Are you wanting your resulting application to use multiple processors,
or are you wanting the compiler to do simultaneous multiple file
compilation? AFAIK, BCB does not do parallel builds.

However, BCB can produce applications that use multiple processors, if
your program uses multiple threads.

--
Chris (TeamB);