I am not even a programmer but somehow listening to Dave is interesting and calming at the same time

Totally! 🥰

Me too

He made me appreciate windows .... that says alooooot

It's so calming, entertaining, educational and just plain fun.

./no

@@mek101whatif7 imma need you to $rm -rf / right tf now

windefproc

Exactly what I came to the comments for

@@jabalahkhaldun3467 Useless unless you --no-preserve-root

That's funny ;-). Yup, I default to 1.25X I think!

Agreed

Zoomers

Hahah :D

I watch these at 2x speed. But then again, I watch most others at 3x.

that probably would lead it to also be faster on the other implementations, since it becomes static memory

And Watts consumed per pass ;-)

@@donaldklopper yeah, outlay is usually nothing compared to power, in an industry. Outlay is usually only an issue for home and small businesses that let equipment sit idle 99.99% of the time, even while "working".

Looks like he fixed that.

nano is so nice :D

@@bobbydazzler6990 No.. masochists!

Glad you enjoyed it!

I appreciate that!

All the best 👍 Per (DK)

It makes me happy to know! Thank you for sharing!

I was about to go and write GoLang, PHP, Pascal implementations, then I saw all the existing implementations and now I'm not sure its worth just being another "me too" :)

Interestingly the CPP versions of this achieve 4820 on my super old i7-870. FYI I achieved 8221 on my i9-9900K

Just me and a couple of shop dogs! Maybe at 200K I can hire a student editor :-)

Single thread performance is still super important. So much software is single threaded.

@@tommcintosh4705 Sure, it's important, but it's not more important than multithreaded performance. Things that tend to take a long time (e.g. compilation, 3d rendering, encoding video files, etc.) also tend to benefit from multiple threads, plus with more threads you can run more software concurrently (e.g. even if most software _was_ single threaded, being able to run more of it simultaneously could be a huge benefit). Also all current implementations of x86 has SMT: an optimization around the weakness that it has in purely single-threaded workloads by allowing a single core to do a bit more than one thread's worth of tasks at once (essentially, a lot of the core's resources are left idle by it's design, and that idle portion can be used to execute another thread at the same time). The M1 specifically has a relatively large advantage in that _one_ aspect, but essentially you're handicapping x86 by not letting it use it's benefits as well. Based on that, it's pretty misleading to show off single-threaded performance and act as if it's _that_ important of a metric. Edit: to be clear, I'm not saying Dave is being misleading here, but that Apple's sudden surge of "hey, check out the single-threaded performance of our M1 part and see how powerful it is, also do benchmarks with single threads plz thx bye" is misleading and the fact it's worked: many people are suddenly trying to come up with super synthetic benchmarks that show off this weakness of x86 and push it as a huge problem, when it is typically _not_ that huge of a deal in practical usage.

@@tommcintosh4705 Well yeah

@@tommcintosh4705 I find that very little software is still single-threaded nowadays. Even games which are often very intensive on a particular single thread are usually multithreaded.

@@nephatrine Yup, no matter how much optimization you do on a single threaded code, it'll be hard to beat just spawning a crap ton of threads, even with bad optimization (if you can that is). I recently had a .Net code run on a single thread for almost 50 minutes (that was optimized), but running it on 12 threads got it below 5 minutes. Try doing that on 1 core I dare you. (Also, later I got it running on my GPU using OpenCL, run the same task in under 10 seconds XD)

Thanks for the kind words!

Glad you liked it!

ikr

also cost makes it impressive for its performance you could get almost 3 Mac minis for the cost of just the threadripper chip

@@michaelhenecke the threadripper is a server chip, no person needs that many cores

@@jan-lukas Yep, and we can get a decent gaming laptop with mac price

For the record, gcc and clang won't use modulo explicitly in debug builds if index is unsigned, msvc will. However if index is signed, msvc and gcc wont use modulo but clang will.

@@pikachulovesketchup666 of course all compilers does it, my observation was simply about debug vs release builds, and as Nathan showed thats not the entire story today.

Hey, thanks!

Living the dream!

I may be joining you, Liberal Lunatic Free Zone...

I agree the M1 is definitely doing something interesting for x86 emulation, though it appears to be just adding hardware support for strong memory ordering when running code intended for the x86, which given the cache heavy nature of this benchmark probably wouldn’t have much effect.

This was the straw that broke the camel's back in favour of me buying an M1 Mac after a decade of netbooks and secondhand business laptops from Japan. The high performance with long battery life and low heat output got me close, but not close enough to fork out the $$$ until I saw even the x86 emulation was sometimes faster than on x86 hardware.

@@andrewdunbar828 what makes Dave’s tests here interesting is that the M1 is a Laptop CPU... the Threadripper is a Desktop CPU. It will be fun to see what Apple do in the Desktop space with their ARM implementation!

@@blooddude I might be mistaken, but from what I know the ARM based architectures don't scale that well.

@@blooddude if anything

Code a prime calculator in ladder logic ;)

@@stonent I do most of the stuff in FB, but point taken lol

Got a similar result on my AMD Ryzen 7 4800H with Radeon Graphics, no OC in a Laptop. Passes: 9840, Time: 5.000000, Avg: 0.000508, Limit: 1000000, Count1: 78498, Count2: 78498, Valid: 1

I got 8200 passes on Ryzen 3600X but compiled with MSVC. WTF?

Using clang in Ubuntu 21.04, my Ryzen 4750GE w/o overclock: Passes: 10777, Time: 5.000000, Avg: 0.000464, Limit: 1000000, Count1: 78498, Count2: 78498, Valid: 1

I was wondering what was going on; glad to see I'm not alone. 3900X @ 4.2GHz all-core OC -> Windows 10 -> VirtualBox VM running Mint 20.1 = 9384 passes.

Running PrimeCPP on my iMac with a 10700K CPU results in: Passes: 8607, Time: 5.000000, Avg: 0.000581, Limit: 1000000, Count1: 78498, Count2: 78498, Valid: 1

Glad you liked it! I'm always paying attention and trying :-)

Cool! I've seen a 12000 as well from another viewer, but I think he was overclocked!

@@DavesGarage , User_Overclocked_Error - Only Machines Should Be Overclocked (0xB00B1377)

Some coders want everything available in the language they already know. That's how we got the do it all in Python crowd and do it all in JavaScript crowd as well.

I do heaps of programming with deep learning, sometimes Web server logic, etc. A lot also includes prototyping, so my calculations of "speed" always include how long I need to code. Sure, had I written my code in pure C/C++/etc., it probably would have been 100 times faster than it is now. But I need to get stuff done instead of obsessing on how low-level I can get. Had I done that, I would probably have finished 10% of my work shortly before retirement in a couple of decades. It's perfectly sensible that there's languages on so many levels (no pun intended). No point on starting a war over _that_, too. Except for R. This just sucks. ;)

You smashed it? Do I sound like Peter McKinnon? You can just lightly click it. But I thank you nonetheless!