this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
364 points (94.4% liked)

Technology

59206 readers
2846 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it::Apple still sells expensive "Pro" computers with just 8GB of RAM and charges a fortune for more.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Correct, cache exists for that reason. But youre still loosing time and space by saving it to memory ( cache is just faster acccess for the cpu. Its still in ram or in the pipeline to be pushed to ram on next flush ).

Also true, per thread you would need more memory to save the cpu's state when switching threads. Now i kinda want to do some calculations and tests to see at what point it gets better.
I always figured that per thread more memory is needed, but that the thread itself needed less memory ( or time to access it ) because it can contain more temp values in the cpu's registers.

Again though, there claim is bullshit or not totally depends on the kind of work youre doing and for video work i consider it bullshit as well :')