experchange > delphi

skybuck2000 (10-18-19, 10:16 AM)
I am drooling over the idea of having a C64 =D

Which in this case would be a C=computer 64=cores ! LOLOLOL.

I really want a 64-core computer, which would be capable of 128 threads.

I wanted such a parallel computer since 1999 or so, and it has taken this industry almost 20 years to reach that and now maybe it will become true.

The number 64 is just magical.

32 bit system, 64 bit systems.

Commodore 64.

And with 64 cores it will be easy to do the following:

8x8 (2d) rendering or visualizations = 64.

4x4x4 = (3d) processing also 64.

These nice spatial distribution of cores could prevent additional software processing logic to work around odd numbers, in this case it fits so perfect and beautifully it will lead to higher performance and more tight optimizations possibly.

That's why I as a programmer am so excited and hyped about this idea of perhaps owning a 64 core processing dream/monster pc.

And yes the same effect can be achieved with just "64 multi threading" on non-64-core machines, but it will just not be as cool/efficient as additional context switching will be necessary and that would suck somewhat.

With a true 64 core machine the 64-thread software should be able to run more efficient than other configurations.

Anyway, let me know the following:

1. If you are hyped too for a 64-core processing monster.
2. And if so let me know your reasons ?!

Can you think of reasons why a 64-core processor would be a dream ?!

Let me know your thoughts of it and about it.

I was started with an atari console then moved to a C64 (commodore).

And no I really want an AMD-X64-64 core processing monster.

But AMD is taking soooo lonnnggg to come out with something for consumers.

I hope it happens though... there are some rumors.

I know there are epyc 64 core monsters and rome 64 core monsters... though these either run very hot or run at 2.0 ghz... and possibly have more instructions in them then perhaps a consumer grade cpu not sure about that though, or maybe even vice versa.

My dream processor would also be capable of at least 4.0 GHz on a single core for old computer programs and games.

So if threadripper 3 can run at least 1 core at 4.0 ghz and then the othersare 2.0 GHz or maybe 2 at 4.0 GHz and the rest at 2.0 GHz.

Or even 1 core at 5.0 GHz and the rest lower.

THAN I WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE OVER THE MOON OF JOY with such a thing/beast of a processor.

I will probably buy it and try to cool it no costs saved on cooling.

Such a beast will probably last for the next 20 years.

It might very well be the last computer I ever buy.

"The LAST PC" movie lol.

But maybe not though... maybe I will live long enough to buy another one...or perhaps there will be a spectacular development with quantum computers or sub-atomic particles...

But maybe a daughter card/extension card would be sufficient for a "quantum-card".

I just cleaned my computer today... so less cleaning would be nice.

Not sure if water cooling will bring less cleaning or more cleaning work.

I have seen at least one video on youtube where the copper started oxiding and bactery started growing in water, maybe it's even more work to clean that stuff out or not...

Some cleaning will probably be necessary for such a beast even with air cooling.

Cleaning fans, blowing dust of heatsinks.

What kind of beast of a PC case will be capable of cooling a possible threadripper 3 release with 64 cores ?!?

For now I expect AMD to release a 24 core and maybe a 32 core.

But I am going to shit myself with joy if a 64 core threadripper will come as well ! LOL.

It's too tempting for me to try a 64-core component. I MUST HAVE IT even ifit burns up like a moth getting too close to the sun.

At least it was one hell of a ride.

But I will try and find a way too cool it, perhaps with your help, perhaps not ! ;) :)

I have seen some very nice corsair cooling solution with water for cpu and graphics card, it's a chore probably to build something like that... linus on youtube tried it had some leaks... hope it's not that bad.

But for a 64-core processor system with big fat titan or something like that in it. I am willing to go all the way to build a once-in-a-life-time, maybe two-in-a-life-time or maybe even a three-in-a-life-time computer.

But as you can see and guessed it. I only pull out all the stops if it's worth the effort.

I am not going to do that for a shitty 4 or 8 core system lol. That don't float my boat.

Might be nice if it was passive but otherwise no deal.

I want my new system to be FUTURE proof/ready. I want it to be extensible.


64 GB is a shithole in my tooth in just a few years... it's inadequate to say the least.

1 GB per core or something ?! BLEH.

Anyway I've also been thinking of maybe going with NETWORK ATTACHED storage..

Cause storage-shortage has ALWAYS HELD ME BACK and LIMITED ME in what I cando and run with my/on computer.

And this is starting to piss me off.

Stuffing a PC full with harddisks will obstruct airflow a bit, and makes the harddisk dusty... which they can handle... but still.

By moving the harddisk storage into a seperate device it will at least not obstruct the mega-processor's airflow, and motherboard and graphics cards.

I am also thinking of going with external extensions like external-usb-floppy-disks and cd/dvd/blue-rom drives also for backwards compatibility.

I don't really use that stuff anymore but it's still fun to be able to readold stuff when the occasion arrives. Feels odd not to be able to do that, kinda horrific in way... I want it to be a dream. If I wanna boot some experimental OS from a floppy disk or cd-rom it would be nice if my computer can do that too.

Nowadays there is usb-booting probably sd-card booting and solid state diskbooting.

I WANT A WHOLE LOT OF BOOTING options for my new computer, booting from external devices so my PC will be extendeable in the future with new experimental software without jeapodizing my existing install base.

Maybe I want to own some kind of BOX... where I can store all kinds of SD-cards... so I can store software/data on them and have them nicely stored away... without losing them or it become a big pile of floppy disks mountain ! LOL (sorted by labels ! =D)

The idea of expanding my computer's capabilities and thus my own capabilities by augmenting my PC with external devices is starting to become a bit more appealing to me....

Though there is the risk of loss of devices, phyiscal damage cause of dropping, and electrical sparks/surges of power/voltage differentials.... this might hold me back a bit in this regards... but it's kinda tempting..

Especially SD-cards... so far I have not experienced any significant electrical discharges ?! Hopefully it stays like that ?!

So maybe SD-cards are the safest solution to adding additional storage space to computer.

Except these cards are so fricking tiny... they are easy to loose... hmmm..but also nice to hide... for shady stuff.... but I don't have that much shady stuff LOL.

I'm starting to get a bit annoyed with AMD promising so much.... via rumorsperhaps... "yes we have a 64 core system" it's comming... at least... somehow these rumors are being spread...

Perhaps this is an attempt to keep buyers away from the competition... in that case it's a dirty trick ! And just stop doing that !

But if AMD DOES release a 64-core threadripper before the end of the year ?!

THEN I WILL BE AMAZED AND BLOWN AWAY... even if it just runs at 2.0 GHz... but I have kinda already seen that with ROME ?! So that does not yet impress... except that it can run on a consumer grade motherboard with entertainment options like build onboard audio... so that's interesting.

Gaming with 2.0 ghz can definetly be done with optimized operating system configurations... but for the latest and greatest games, 4.0 GHz is probablynecessary.

However I do see some game developers trying to off-load processing to multiple cores to improve input-latency for gamers.

I also expect much more graphics effects to be computed on additional cores..

Plus new algorithms will become possible like, chemistry calculations for maybe fire effects or explosions. And especially wear and tear/friction calculations.

Seen one new game engine/game with voxel graphics... for such a game friction calculations for voxels could be nice, allowing a new type of game to become reality and to allow more realistic destruction of environments and such... interesting experimental game engine.

Personally I look kinda forward to giving simulated evolution a re-try withmore processing power. Though it will probably still not be enough, which is kinda a bummer.... but at least there is some speed up... maybe it will be a bit better than expected and that might still be nice to go forward with some new evolution attempts. Already seen that it works somewhat at bacteria level... but I am curious and want to evolve some more complex digitallive if possible at all... and more processing power will be necessary forthat.

Alternative idea is to use some kind of "evolution-coin" or so and reward participants with coins for any contributions to evolution computation attempts =D but it will have to be sha256 hashed... so that is kinda a bummer.... and not sure how secure and usefull this will be, but might be great fun.. This can be done for any system though, including my current dual-core AMD x2 3800+.

The longer I use my DreamPC from 2006 the more amazed I am at how well it still holds up and how well it can still surf the internet and so forth.

On one hand it will be painfull to say goodbye to it... it will stay on my desk for a while probably to move files around and to maybe play some multiplayer game on both systems... but eventually it will probably have to or be moved into storage area/spare parts section of my living space.





It's like BUYING A NEW GIRLFRIEND basically WHILE you still love your OLD ONE =D

THE NEW ONE must be 10x BETTER maybe 100x BETTER....



This is a painfull problem I did not forsee when I build this DreamPC from 2006.

It's so dreamy, it's hard to say goodbye too... it's like ripping out my heart.

Even though I very desperately want more SPEED from SSD, more RAM to play newer games. MORE STORAGE space embedded for safety reasons and to do MORE.

Better colors for more GAME enjoyment and graphics and movie ENJOYMENT.

Additional/exquisite HDMI audio digital transmission for CRYSTAL CLEAR human voice lyrics in music and increased crispyness/sharpness in music productions and game sounds even to the brink where it sounds so clear that one can clearly here it's synthetic from synthesizers... this is were analog doeshave a unique sound and makes it slightly less synthetic. But I am willingto say goodbye to the slightly warmer feel of ANALOG... for increased fidelty/quality of sound thanks to HDMI audio connections ! ;) :)

Then very maybe HDR... though I have heard some brightness complaints.

I also look very much forward to INCREASED monitor HERTZ refresh rate, from60 or 70 all the way up to 100 or 120 or 140 Herts... for much more crispy/clean video rendering of games and reduces input lag for gaming which is noticable during gaming even on 70 hz sometimes when fps spikes... and also slightly better competiveness vs other gamers =D or on par with them, though for now I do fine without it in some games ;)

Much increased FPS in old games, that be very cool, especially warcraft frozen throne survical chaos 3.01p mod/map. Would be funny to see it run butter smooth on 4.0 GHz ? I wonder if it actually can run smooth.

(Oh that reminds me I should try play company of heroes multiplayer with higher settings now that I have GT 1030 lol, it might still lag a bit but ok.... better late than never lol. Not interested in this game anymore though.... I became too good at it, and game little bit boring, however men of war assault squad might be a little bit more interesting to see it run butter smooth, though even this is a bit easy game with artillery and such ;) :P though it can be a though game too)

World of Warships... but necessity a game I play today ! I am amazed how much optimizations went into this game to make it better over the years... and it's truely an amazing multiplayer game. Perhaps it will get the "intel embree" raytrayicing improvements for shadows from World of Tanks were it's introduced recently. However I did take a look at this embree technology from intel and it seems mostly written in C/C++ with some macros here and there that call special instructions for SSE or so. I would not be surprised if this technology runs just perfectly fine on AMD systems as well or perhaps with slight little modifications for AMD specific instructions/macros.

However World of Warships is full of water, some sun light, lot's of metal of ships... and glass inside the ships. Therefore I think NVIDIA's raytracing technology RTX is a better choice for World of Warships, since it can also do reflections and not just shadows. RTX will make World of Warships look far better than EMBREE at least that's my expectation for now. However RTX is nvidia only, while embree is more general purpose and can run basically on all systems.. and Wargaming the developers of WOWS are very keen on supporting as many systems as possible. However maybe they will do something special for RTX or maybe not... Also Microsoft has Raytracing with DirectX 12... so that might be standardized in near future and more systems might start supporting it and probably will and thus eventually this raytracing technology might become main stream and thus I think we will end up seeing itin this game sometime in the future.

This is an example of a developer that is definetly trying to utilize more cores as they become more available/main stream.

Then there is the playstation 5 rumored to come out with (only) 8 cores... perhaps much more easy to cool. But I have seen mobile phones with 8 cores.

Really, ?! Is this the best you can do sony ?!? Just 8 cores ?!? For me that would kinda be disappointing... How long is this console supposed to last5 years ? 10 years ?! Don't know about that... but that's there decision.

Maybe make this playstation "extenseable" so that gamers can plug in a module to add additional cores... cause the "core-race" seem to be ON and in full swing ! ;) :)

Ofcourse software/games and such have to be developed for it, it has to be possible... but for now I have seen some improvement in this area.... and it's become more real almost every day or at least weekly/monthly basis or so, maybe yearly... but there are plenty of titles out there that require 4 cores as a minimum or so... and this will start to ramp up somewhat :)

Anyway let's take finally a glimpse into the future.

Maybe 64-core will become the new standard... like 64-bit computing is now the defacto/default/standard. For reasons explained above, this could be a sweet spot and a very nice spot to be in ! I for one welcome it ! ;) :)

For competitors I shall leave one last bit of advise, perhaps diversify your CPUs with more diverse LEVEL 1 cache sizes.

It's definetly possible that a CPU with 64 KB L1 cache or 128 L1 cache might be more attractive for certain buyers than a CPU with only 32 KB L1 cache..

It will depend somewhat on the number of cores vs the speed up that a bigger cache might/will give for certain algorithms and applications. This will make it much harder to choose which CPU is best for the job:

1. The one with bigger L1 caches and therefore increased thread performancethanks to less main ram memory latencies.


2. The one with smaller L1 caches but more cores but also more stalls because of main ram memory latencies... This is where maybe hyperthreading mightwork around some of those stalls, not sure how well hyperthreading or SMT works in this regards ?! Anybody wanna shed some light on this ? ;)

Finally let me know your thoughts on the "coolability" of a 64-core consumer grade processing monster/cpu ?! =D ;)

This post long and futuristic enough for now so I am ending right now righther e! ;) :)

Bye for now,
Skybuck ! ;) :) =D

And may the CORES BE WITH YOU ! ;) =D LOL.
skybuck2000 (10-18-19, 12:56 PM)
On Friday, October 18, 2019 at 12:07:01 PM UTC+2, skybu...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, October 18, 2019 at 11:40:56 AM UTC+2, David Brown wrote:
> Perhaps your right, the lack of (dynamic) multi-dimensional array support in C is indeed quite lacking :P* =D

Well you could modify all C compilers so that they will allow a stack of say 1 terrabyte so you can actually use C to create large multi dimensional arrays in it's language without all kinds of hassles.

But no worries, I also posted to Delphi which does have dynamically allocated multi dimensional array support.

Not sure if it will go all the way up to 1 or 2 terrabytes. But with the 64 bit compiler there is a chance that it might be supported in the memory manager.

Time will tell ! ;)

And in Delphi there is also the very nice multi dimensional indexed property feature that gives full control over implementing it and width/height/depth order and such, also known as row/column order in the 2d.

So yes, Delphi at least is more then ready to handle mister big processor and it's big memory support ! =D and if it weren't it 'll be added/implemented in a snap ;)

I am going to start delphi right now, cause this question if Delphi can handle terrabytes of memory is quite intrigueing to me.

Going to write a little test program to see if it compiles/runs and then crashes or not... kinda cool idea.

Here it is my very first terrabyte computer program !

// *** Begin of Program ***

program TestProgram;


{$R *.res}


Test allocating 64 bit quanTITIES (=D) in Delphi 64 bit compiler

version 0.01 created on 18 october(10) 2019 by Skybuck Flying.

Threadripper 3 will support 2 terrabytes of memory.

It's interesting to test if Delphi is ready to allocate such large



Going to do it multi dimensional dynamically as well ! ;) =D



BigArray : array of array of array of integer;

BigArray2 : array of integer;

Help : int64;

procedure Main;
writeln('program started');

// version 1
// allocate array
// seems to compile just fine, but these three quanities are all 32 bit values
SetLength( BigArray, 10*1024, 10*1024, 10*1024 ); // almost one terrabyte

// use array/write to array
BigArray[4123,5123,6123] := 1234;

// read back value and modify it
BigArray[4123,5123,6123] := BigArray[4123,5123,6123] + 100;

// print value
writeln( BigArray[4123,5123,6123] );

// free array
BigArray := nil;

// version 2
// let's allocate it differently to force a 64 bit value or 60 bit value or so

// allocate array
// overflow in conversion or arithemtic operation ! even in 64 bit mode
// SetLength( BigArray2, 1024*1024*1024*1024 ); // exactly one terrabyte

Help := 1024*1024*1024;
Help := Help * 1024;
SetLength( BigArray2, Help ); // exactly one terrabyte

// use array/write to array
// overflow in conversion or arithemtic operation ! even in 64 bit mode
// BigArray2[ 123*1024*1024*1024 ] := 1234;
Help := 1024*1024*1024;
BigArray2[ 123*Help ] := 1234;

// read back value and modify it
// overflow in conversion or arithemtic operation ! even in 64 bit mode
BigArray2[ 123*Help ] := BigArray2[ 123*Help] + 100;

// print value
// overflow in conversion or arithemtic operation ! even in 64 bit mode
writeln( BigArray2[ 123*Help ] );

// free array
BigArray := nil;

writeln('program finished');

on E: Exception do
Writeln(E.ClassName, ': ', E.Message);

// *** End of Program ***

Ofcourse can't run it yet, except if I maybe set page file to 1 terrabyte or more lol... but maybe even then windows won't allow it...

Maybe 2 terrabyte page, but maybe not even then... not sure if windows 7 64 bit will allow allocating such huge memory structures onto virtual ram/disk space.

Would be cool if windows would allow it.

However I don't have the free space to test this out and there would be little point for now cause harddisk are awfull slow.

But maybe see you in the near future when I have 1 or 2 terrabyte RAM system, then I can actually run this program !

And ofcourse this program does show the Delphi language/compiler needs more work to make it more easy to write.

Cause I had to use a helper variable to overcome expression overflow, which kinda sucks.

But at least this program kinda proves the 64 bit delphi compiler is READY for threadripper 3 ! =D

And is in a useable state (with some quircks)! ;)

I hope those get wrinkled out in the coming years ! ;)

Bye for now,


It's not that far off/away anymore.

Make programming terrabyte computer programs as easy and pleasent as possible ! ;) =D

This small little demonstration program does prove/show that Delphi 10.2 is still not ready for prime time terrabyte programming ?!

Let me know if you disagree ?! ;)

Yes I know that this might still compile in 32 bit.

But what if I don't want to compile to 32 bit anymore ?! And just write easy 64 bit terrabyte programs ?!

I should be allowed and capable of doing this, and the decision should be mine and not yours ! =D

Besides, Windows 32 bit IS END OF LIFE CYCLE as far as I know and probably isn't sold anymore and soon to be not sold anymore.

So there is no more COMMERCIAL reason for Delphi to support 32 bit compiling.

However I like it and I am cool with it to support old systems and such... that's ok, that's great, got a bunch of compilers and installers.

But your main attention and default should focus back on 64 bit compiling and 64 bit memory support.

Backwards compatibility with 32 bit is to be placed on the back burner and is now less relevant than ever before !

If certain 32 bit oddities are created in 64 bit compiler SO BE IT.

I hope this is as simple as it can get ?!

I rather have 32 bit compilation mode fail, then they other way around regarding the future of software development.

I know it's harsh.


Adept or perish. Adept and prosper ! ;) =D

See you in the terrabyte age pretty soon ! ;) =D

Byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyye for now,
Terrabuck ! =D
Similar Threads