On 2023-06-02, Bret Busby wrote:
>
> Whoever posted the message to which the above message is a reply, is
An enduring mystery to know why Monnier refuses the convention of
attributions. Then again, one of the smaller mysteries.
Bret Busby wrote:
>
> Whoever posted the message to which the above message is a reply, is showing
> a lack of knowledge of computers; the "speed" of a computer, involves more
> components than simply the CPU - an i9 with 2GB of RAM, will probably not be
> as "fast" as in i3 with 32GB of RAM.
On 6/2/23 12:19, Stefan Monnier wrote:
The most recent general-purpose Intel CPU without VT-X is from 2012.
[...]
*everything* on processors that old is slow.
Actually, for many (most?) single-threaded applications, I wouldn't be
surprised if some 2010 CPUs end up within a factor 3 of the
On 3/6/23 03:19, Stefan Monnier wrote:
The most recent general-purpose Intel CPU without VT-X is from 2012.
[...]
*everything* on processors that old is slow.
Actually, for many (most?) single-threaded applications, I wouldn't be
surprised if some 2010 CPUs end up within a factor 3 of the
Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > The most recent general-purpose Intel CPU without VT-X is from 2012.
> [...]
> > *everything* on processors that old is slow.
>
> Actually, for many (most?) single-threaded applications, I wouldn't be
> surprised if some 2010 CPUs end up within a factor 3 of the most
> The most recent general-purpose Intel CPU without VT-X is from 2012.
[...]
> *everything* on processors that old is slow.
Actually, for many (most?) single-threaded applications, I wouldn't be
surprised if some 2010 CPUs end up within a factor 3 of the most badass
desktop you can find today.
6 matches
Mail list logo
