1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

Computer spec

Discussion in 'Computer Related Help & Discussion' started by gavin caventer, Jun 12, 2019.

  1. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    That seems to be what google thinks anyway. Amazing how things shrink.

    I don't know exactly how the cores and graphics processor access the memory - in my simple mind the graphics processor had its own memory so that not only was the CPU freed from graphics work but that work wasn't competing for memory storage.

    The cores probably each have some dedicated memory and then share from a pool. If one core can hog all the memory then the advantages of having more than one core are lost.
  2. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    No. Which is why I suggested the Wikipedia page that provides a good overview of multicore processing.

    A multicore processor run by a suitable operating system and fed instructions from a suitable program can run commands in different cores while other commands from the same program are being run in other cores. It's a form of parallel processing in that multiple commands are run at the same time but the commands are all part of the same (linear) program. The main advantage of multicore processors is that they get round the heating problems of increasing clock speed (provided the programming can take advantage of the technology).
  3. Dorset_Mike

    Dorset_Mike Grumpy Old Fart

    I am well aware of that I worked in and taught electronics for over 45 years; I was just adding the RAM comment prompted by PeteRob's post earlier
  4. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    You put "(with 16GB RAM that's only 2GB per core.)" suggesting you thought that RAM is allocated to cores.
  5. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    If you are using a program like PTAssembler for pans it does allocate memory equally to each core. I have only four Cores so it Can handle four image calculations at the same time and you can actually see this happening as the GUI shows the progress. Some people actually run out of memory because of this. The blender also works the same way. Max Lyons wrote PTA to work that way to speed up what used to be a long winded process when stitching high numbers of large image files for gigapixel pans.
    The program allows you nominate how many cores to use so was to limit the. Problem.
  6. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Of course it can.

    But that's still one program so far as the operating system is concerned - with one pot of RAM - and how the program allocates RAM (and instructions) while it is running is contained in one process. When the time comes to swap, that whole process will be yanked out, the whole of RAM will be available to whatever takes its place and all the cores will share all the RAM unless and until the incoming job does something else but even then it'll still be one process sharing one pot of RAM.

    This is a simplification of what has become a very complex area of system programming but it's close enough for our purposes.
  7. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    Absolutely. However some programs like photoshop allow you to allocate memory for its exclusive use. so it is probably best to close other programs when running hungry ones. From my point of view 16Gb is about the minimum these days, for any sort of comfort.

    My little tablet only has two Gb and gives memory warnings on a regular basis.

Share This Page