This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Somebody having access to a Windows machine with > 64 CPUs?
- From: Andrey Repin <anrdaemon at yandex dot ru>
- To: Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa dot com>, cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 19:54:02 +0300
- Subject: Re: Somebody having access to a Windows machine with > 64 CPUs?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150810160011 dot GC13029 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <6E689F0D-F196-4D1B-B6FA-782A27AF936C at etr-usa dot com>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
Greetings, Warren Young!
> On Aug 10, 2015, at 10:00 AM, Corinna Vinschen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> for testing, I need somebody running a small test program on a machine
>> with more than 64 CPUs under Windows 7 or later.
> I donât think thatâs possible today. Windows 7 Professional is limited to
> 2 physical processors and 256 cores, so the only way to get the result you
> want is a 2x33+ core system without Hyperthreading, or a 2x17+ core system with HT.
She didn't say she need an output from "Pro" version.
If you're referring to "Windows 7", that's just a generation, Windows Server
will suffice as well.
> The lesser versions of Windows 7 also have 256-core limits, but only allow
> 1 physical processor, so youâd need a 65+ core processor without HT, or 33+ with HT.
> According to Newegg, the biggest ones available today are 16-core, so you
> can just barely hit 64 on Win7 Pro with HT, today.
> I think you need to wait another processor generation to break 64 logical cores under Windows 7.
> The contemporaneous version of Server is, I believe 2008 R2, which has 4+
> socket limits in all but the Foundation version, which would let you get to
> your 72 or 96 logical processor counts with todayâs processors.
With best regards,
Monday, August 10, 2015 19:53:00
Sorry for my terrible english...