Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

For my work machine I don't care much about the price (to a point) or the power consumption. I want the fastest compiles money can buy. This article is exactly what I want to see, and confirms my decision to go for the 5900x. Now if AMD can just get them in stock. The local waiting list is months long.


If you want the fastest compiles money can buy, wouldn't you be looking at a massive, 3rd gen threadripper?


If you mean the 3rd gen server chips, they're not released yet.

Also there are diminishing returns as core count increases. I'm doubting that a 5950x is worth it over the 5900x for me.


You don't run parallel compiles? They can use all your cores, with a linear speedup ...

I meant the latest Ryzen Threadrippers, whatever "generation" they are now. The 3970X would likely be a good example.


Depends on the language of course. Most JS tools are strongly single threaded. Rust is quite good for multi core and benefitted hugely from my 3900x but even that only keeps all the cores busy for the first 60% of a compile then we're limited by the slowest chain of dependencies.


The compiles are parallel, but not all work can be done in parallel or divided among 32 threads equally. So from 24 to 32 threads is not typically a 33% increase unless your compiles are huge (like the Linux kernel).


I'm opting for the 5950x. Yeah it's 33% more cores for 45% more money, but in for a penny.. The 5900x is already split across 2 core complexes and the 5950 will just add 2 more cores to each. Cinebench multi-core does shows exactly what you would hope adding the extra cores: 5900x is 75% the score with 75% the cores vs the 5950.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: