Overclocking a process... is this possible?

CPUnltd · 2010-06-27 02:48:39

I couldn't come up with a better way to ask this question... what I'm curious about is if I build a unnecessarily powerful machine (say with a 6-core 2.5GHz and 16GB PC-8500 and put just basic arch, a desktop and a few tools, can I make a process use more than it's usually supposed to? (let's say Ardour uses 12% CPU and 273MB of RAM, can I force it to use 50% CPU and 8GB of RAM to significantly speed up processing the audio it's working with... using something other than/in conjunction with realtime priority?)

falconindy · 2010-06-27 03:38:42

Your question doesn't make sense. Processing priority (niceness) has little to do with load distribution of a single app.

If a process is using 273mb of RAM, it's because it only needs that much. How would it use the extra RAM? Perhaps it could spew garbage into memory just for the sake of using it.

CPU usage is different, but along the same vein it's not going to happen by some magical flick of a switch. In order for a process to consume "more" CPU, 1 of 2 things needs to happen:
1) usage of a technology such as intel power boost (which only benefits single threaded apps and is more of a bandaid solution)
2) rewrite the app to use multiple threads (thereby utilizing more than 1 core)

CPUnltd · 2010-06-27 06:56:48

well, from your response, I'm lead to believe that anymore hardware than is needed for the software's "limits" is overkill and unnecessary... but if I re-encode a DVD and the software's standard max is about 36 mns for a two-hour movie, there's nothing I can do in the way of hardware upgrades that can push that re-encode down to 20 mins or less? that's essentually the kind of thing I'm looking to do, which sounds impossible. Aside from multi-threading, I can't boost performance any more... which means that high amounts of RAM is really just for multitasking...

falconindy · 2010-06-27 12:34:17

Not quite... the problem lies somewhat in the way hardware has developed in parallel with software.

When you see a system monitor reading a constant 50% on a 2 core processor, this means that you're running a single threaded process and only 1 core is really doing anything. All other things equal, a 3ghz dual core processor will complete this particular process in less real time than a 2ghz processor. But in both cases, the system monitor will read 50%.

Your conclusion about RAM is correct.

CPUnltd · 2010-06-27 16:57:57

I see... so when all said and done, unless I'm seriously multitasking a lot of powerful software, more than 4GB of ram (in most cases) is generally overkill on a linux machine (but a 6-core processor vs a 2- or 4-core is a key improvement...

which tells me that it doesn't make sense that these higher RAM modules are so damned expensive (other than "it's the newest thing, so let's milk the consumer dry while we can")

ngoonee · 2010-06-27 22:49:57

Its only overkill if you don't need it. The system works together (between various components) in various ways, but RAM is basically there so you won't ever have to hit swap. VMs eat RAM, most apps can be rewritten to take advantage of huge amounts of RAM, mainly through caching disk access tasks.

The expense is typical for first-generation computing products.

v.blackwood · 2010-06-28 07:08:36

mmm ... VMs ... If you feel you're not getting the most of your hardware, try running one or two VMs, it def. pays off in productivity. Multi monitors are a somewhat expensive addition, but IMO also worth it for multi-tasking heavy applications. Pic related. The clock speed listed on the 7 side is inaccurate .. its really 3.36. Virtual Machines are very useful though.

http://i45.tinypic.com/14xuo5.jpg

Arch Linux

#1 2010-06-27 02:48:39

Overclocking a process... is this possible?

#2 2010-06-27 03:38:42

Re: Overclocking a process... is this possible?

#3 2010-06-27 06:56:48

Re: Overclocking a process... is this possible?

#4 2010-06-27 12:34:17

Re: Overclocking a process... is this possible?

#5 2010-06-27 16:57:57

Re: Overclocking a process... is this possible?

#6 2010-06-27 22:49:57

Re: Overclocking a process... is this possible?

#7 2010-06-28 07:08:36

Re: Overclocking a process... is this possible?

Board footer