Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Not a lot. Most software isn't very parallel. I think 2 fast cores would be the sweet spot for most people, for the foreseeable future.

I think a question like this will get very biased answers, since most people aren't very inclined to post "paid a lot, don't really use it" and rather stay mum.

BTW taken out of context, "people with many CPU cores" would mostly consist of 8-core Android phone owners. They also do little with all those cores.




I regularly see 8 cores over 50% utilization. So sure 90% of the time you don't really need it, but a lot more things are parallel now than you might think.

Consider, if your PC is going to last 3+ years, and you average ~40 hours a week on it then the most demanding 1% is still 48+ hours.


> I regularly see 8 cores over 50% utilization.

What happens if you close background browser tabs? :b


Standard office computer here is a quad core (AMD APU), and it actually makes quite a bunch of stuff faster (e.g. conversion of scanned documents) compared to the previous-generation dual cores.


It was shown that for most games nowadays 2 cores will result in micro-stutter. For example the Pentium G4560 (2x 3.50GHz) has pretty good average FPS, but if you look at the 99th percentile, it's worse than similar priced quad cores.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: