Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

ForumsDiscussion Forum → Tech cpu usage
Tech cpu usage
2008-04-16, 10:53 AM #1
With a multi-core system I was told the cpu's should balance the load evenly. Dreamweaver seems to eat up one of the cores the entire time it runs
Attachment: 19084/cpu.jpg (50,668 bytes)
"Nulla tenaci invia est via"
2008-04-16, 11:20 AM #2
Originally posted by Z@NARDI:
With a multi-core system I was told the cpu's should balance the load evenly. Dreamweaver seems to eat up one of the cores the entire time it runs


Whoever told you this lied.

Applications will only use one processor unless they are specifically programmed to use more than one. Multithreading an existing application suite is difficult and expensive, so relatively few companies have bothered doing it.
2008-04-16, 11:35 AM #3
Also: Dreamweaver using up all that CPU proves the point that Dreamweaver sucks.
2008-04-16, 11:58 AM #4
Originally posted by Cool Matty:
Also: Dreamweaver using up all that CPU proves the point that Dreamweaver sucks.


agreed.. im on a new app hunt right now
"Nulla tenaci invia est via"
2008-04-16, 12:33 PM #5
Originally posted by Z@NARDI:
agreed.. im on a new app hunt right now


I'd love to hear what you come up with, I use Dreamweaver myself but would love a better option.
Was cheated out of lions by happydud
Was cheated out of marriage by sugarless
2008-04-16, 12:36 PM #6
nvu
2008-04-16, 12:40 PM #7
crimson editor
On a Swedish chainsaw: "Do not attempt to stop chain with your hands or genitals."
2008-04-16, 12:42 PM #8
Notepad.
2008-04-16, 12:44 PM #9
notepad :p comon this isn't 1998 ;)

Originally posted by djwguitarman:


that actually looks like exactly what I am after
"Nulla tenaci invia est via"
2008-04-16, 12:45 PM #10
Originally posted by djwguitarman:


Seconded

Zan I've been using Crimson since Z2 and before haha
一个大西瓜
2008-04-16, 12:56 PM #11
Originally posted by Z@NARDI:
notepad :p comon this isn't 1998 ;)


No, it's 2008.

You should still learn using notepad.
2008-04-16, 12:58 PM #12
Coda if you're using Mac.

PSPad or Komodo IDE if you're using Windows.
2008-04-16, 1:18 PM #13
Originally posted by Rob:
No, it's 2008.

You should still learn using notepad.


Crimson editor is like notepad with syntax highlighting.
On a Swedish chainsaw: "Do not attempt to stop chain with your hands or genitals."
2008-04-16, 1:23 PM #14
Originally posted by Rob:
No, it's 2008.

You should still learn using notepad.

Crimson Editor (and many other applications) is essentially notepad: 2008 edition. It just has syntax highlighting and numerous other features that just help you work with your raw code. No point and click/drag and drop crap.
Naked Feet are Happy Feet
:omgkroko:
2008-04-16, 1:24 PM #15
Originally posted by djwguitarman:
Crimson editor is like notepad with syntax highlighting.


It's also ugly as sin. Editors made in the past 4 years have way more features, look better, and are more customizable.
2008-04-16, 1:26 PM #16
Notepad++, has syntax highlighting for a ton of stuff.
$do || ! $do ; try
try: command not found
Ye Olde Galactic Empire Mission Editor (X-wing, TIE, XvT/BoP, XWA)
2008-04-16, 3:06 PM #17
not to mention tabs for multiple open files is necessary.

whats to learn about notepad? it's a text editor.
"Nulla tenaci invia est via"
2008-04-16, 3:13 PM #18
Rob thinks you're using the visual designer in Dreamweaver and probably isn't aware that it has an awesome autocomplete function for code.

Aptana Studio is the best free alternative, and in some ways is better.
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2008-04-16, 3:26 PM #19
I have traditionally used Notepad, but I am loving Notepad++.

2008-04-16, 3:37 PM #20
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Whoever told you this lied.

Applications will only use one processor unless they are specifically programmed to use more than one. Multithreading an existing application suite is difficult and expensive, so relatively few companies have bothered doing it.


then what's so good about core 2 duo's / quad's?
2008-04-16, 3:40 PM #21
We've hit a glass ceiling in cheap core speeds; it's cheaper to get multiple cores instead of getting faster clock speeds now. AFAIK.

The thing is any operating system now a days can take advantage of multiple cores to run multiple applications side-by-side on different cores.

The issue Zanardi had was that Dreamweaver only supports one core so it is confined to one core. But other apps are free to run on other cores as the OS assigns them. If they only support one core each they are confined their single cores, but the OS spreads those one-core apps equally over all the cores available.

2008-04-16, 4:43 PM #22
Originally posted by ragna:
then what's so good about core 2 duo's / quad's?

Classical tasks like compression and encryption, physics simulations and rendering are fairly easy to multithread. Algorithms implemented using functional languages, or loop-level parallelization extensions for programming languages let you very easily span code across multiple processors. Newer programming languages and platforms take advantage of a large thread pool - allowing low-latency deferral, asynchronous functions and delegates.

Using all four cores, it takes me around 7 minutes to transcode a full-length movie for my iPod Touch.
2008-04-16, 4:44 PM #23
Using all two it takes me three hours
:smith:

↑ Up to the top!