If you don't want to get into the weeds on ECC again, please do not reinitiate discussion. I do not agree that "the additional cost of ECC is very low compared to the cost of developer time over the two years that they're expected to use it", but I will restrict my disagreement to the forked thread that you created. Please repost there.
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Kris Maglione <kmagli...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 03:07:55PM -0500, Jeff Muizelaar wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Sophana "Soap" Aik <s...@mozilla.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I'm in the middle of getting another evaluation machine with a 10-core >>> W-Series Xeon Processor (that is similar to the 7900X in terms of clock >>> speed and performance) but with ECC memory support. >>> >>> I'm trying to make sure this is a "one size fits all" machine as much as >>> possible. >> >> >> What's the advantage of having a "one size fits all" machine? I >> imagine there's quite a range of uses and preferences for these >> machines. e.g some people are going to be spending more time waiting >> for a single core and so would prefer a smaller core count and higher >> clock, other people want a machine that's as wide as possible. Some >> people would value performance over correctness and so would likely >> not want ECC. etc. I've heard a number of horror stories of people >> ending up with hardware that's not well suited to their tasks just >> because that was the only hardware on the list. > > > High core count Xeons will divert power from idle cores to increase the > clock speed of saturated cores during mostly single-threaded workloads. > > The advantage of a one-size-fits-all machine is that it means more of us > have the same hardware configuration, which means fewer of us running into > independent issues, more of us being able to share software configurations > that work well, easier purchasing and stocking of upgrades and accessories, > ... I own a personal high-end Xeon workstation, and if every developer at > the company had to go through the same teething and configuration troubles > that I did while breaking it in, we would not be in a good place. > > And I don't really want to get into the weeds on ECC again, but the > performance of load-reduced ECC is quite good, and the additional cost of > ECC is very low compared to the cost of developer time over the two years > that they're expected to use it. > > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
