The noblest of all dogs is the hot dog. It feeds the hand that bites it - Hot Dog Restaurant
|
|
|
Microsoft banishes usage graphs so Windows 8 can show 640 cores
SOFTWARE REDEVELOPER Microsoft has tweaked the processor usage viewer in Windows 8 making it easier to monitor large numbers of processors.
Microsoft showed off changes to Windows 8 task manager earlier this month but waited until yesterday to unveil changes it made to viewing processor core usage. Gone are the line charts, to be replaced by a simple percentage and a heat map.
According to Microsoft the use of heat maps, similar to what it has done with processes, allows users to view more data easily. The firm said that Windows 8 will be able to display real time usage of up to 640 cores, though we think most will settle for eight or 16 for the time being.
Microsoft's emphasis on viewing usage levels of up to 640 cores is really neither here nor there. Machines with that many cores are likely to be servers and the market for third party monitoring software, including all sorts of resource metrics aside from core usage, is worth millions. Resorting to the performance tab in task manager is really a last ditch effort for users desperate to find out what is going wrong.
What is more interesting is that Microsoft has to show off these changes now in order to try to build up hype for Windows 8. Perhaps Microsoft is realising that the shine of its Windows 8 Metro user interface might not be enough to tempt existing Windows users to part with their cash once again. µ
Tags: Microsoft
Share this:
Share
Rumor says for Win9, Microsoft task manager will use TB and GB for large memory totals. Darn, I always thought 1073741824KB was a sensible display.
Microsoft should re-introduce Windows XP. Just fix the bugs they refused to fix originally and it would be a best seller. After all, XP is the last OS Microsoft was able to sell without the use of force.
I have to see this, Windows is as multi-threaded as Dos can multitask.
Until they make a good os as basis, it will be useless.
Anybody run Linux on their latest multi-core CPU? It screems in speed, where windows is slow, no matter how many cores you through at it, as it still can't ignore a single error and make everything stop until you click the stupid OK or Cancel :-)
I'd have been more impressed if they had included gpu monitoring so we could have everything under one roof.
If for some reason you'll get so many logical cores (and that is unlikely since increasing cores has diminishing returns) then I don't think this is the solution really.
This looks like the first thing you'd think up for such an imaginary situation when you don't give it much thought.
The immediate obvious flaw for instance that you can't visualize a usage history in a effective manner when you just show colored boxes with current state.
As usual, the ignorance on this site is breath taking.
To the author: Task Manager would normally be the first port of call for investigating a performance issue, not the last. Followed by Performance Monitor, and then third party software might be a last resort - although there is little that most systems do other than centrally report on the information that Windows already provides.
To Veli - the board that you mention is not one computer that can run a single OS image, but is many seperate servers in a box. If the desktop version of Windows 8 already scales to 64 x 10 Core CPUs, then it is clear that Microsoft would have little issue in going beyond this for server versions if required. However, just how many systems with greater than 640 cores do you think there are out there? My guess is very very few.
Drew, Windows already scales very effectively across multiple CPUs, and architectural inovations like per processor cache lists to enable this that first appeared in the Windows Kernel, were quickly adopted by other OSs like Linux. Windows also still has the advantage of a Hybrid Microkernel architecture, as opposed to the legacy monolithic format of most UNIX platforms. Having to recompile your kernel and then create a new boot ram disk image every time you want to add or update a core driver is rediculous.
What?
The new Experimental board with 1024 ultrs low power ARM7 cores is not supported?
It's Bill Gates again:
Nobody will need more than 640 cores...ever!
A processor the size of a cell, so can each cell be a processor or core....??if a body has more that a trillion cells or processors(cores), which software can make everything work fine???!!!but this is only one a layer.
Greetings and Salutations.
They couldn't come up with 512 or 768? 640 reminds the famous quote :)
It's not as though they have worked out how to effectively use 2 cores, so why 640 or whatever?
the shine of its Windows 8 Metro user interface
There is no shine in the Metro UI. Indeed, it is a sink for light. Abandon all hope ye photons who enter it.
Metro looks more like a bolted-on "feature" designed to make Windows 8 different from Windows 7, and therefore desirable.
640 cores is enough for anyone
See, another good change in Windows 8 in my opinion. Now can you banish Metro into the bin where it deserves to go?
That last comment in the article doesn't really make much sense about how they are releasing this because of a lack of interest in Metro.
They have been releasing public reports on new features and functionality more than once per week (regardless of whether those features are well received or not). If anything I thought this particular feature was a rather subtle release by them compared to most of the others. The updated file copying UI for example seemed more drastic and interesting a change to me.
I would say the only reason why the Metro UI was pushed in the beginning was not because people would want to buy windows 8 because of it, but more because they probably know that they need to gradually desensitize the public to such a drastic change. (And of course, that most of the information people know comes from the BUILD event, which was designed to teach people how to develop applications for Windows 8 so that makes sense.)