Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

blog.howardjohn.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 522 posts

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#311

Post by kelnos »

The new top of the line CPU might only cost $500, but even if you have a Framework laptop with replaceable parts, the new top-of-the-line mainboard is going to cost you north of $1k. If you don't, you're probably talking about a new $2k+ full laptop purchase.

And I don't want a desktop.

But I would agree that, when you are purchasing that new laptop (or mainboard), you get the best that you can afford. Pushing your upgrade cycle out even just one year can save you a lot of money, while still getting the performance you need.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#312

Post by kelnos »

sgarland wrote: post #218
bornfreddy wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember I was blown away by some machine that compiled it in ~45 minutes. Pentium Pro baby! Those were the days.

My memory must be faulty, then, because I was mostly building it on an Athlon XP 2000+, which is definitely a few generations newer than a Pentium Pro. I’m probably thinking of various other packages, since at the time I was all-in on Gentoo. I distinctly remember trying to get distcc running to have the other computers (a Celeron 333 MHz and Pentium III 550 MHz) helping out for overnight builds. Can’t say that I mis…

Linux kernel compilation time depends heavily on what you're compiling though. You can have wildly different compilation times just by enabling or disabling some drivers or subsystems.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#313

Post by kelnos »

JonChesterfield wrote: post #126
sgarland wrote: post #98

Tangential: TIL you can compile the Linux kernel in < 1 minute (on top-spec hardware). Seems it’s been a while since I’ve done that, because I remember it being more like an hour or more.

I'd like to know why making debian packages containing the kernel now takes substantially longer than a clean build of the kernel. That seems deeply wrong and rather reduces the joy at finding the kernel builds so quickly.

Are you building the Debian kernel with the same .config as when you build the kernel directly? If not, that's probably why. A Debian kernel build will build basically everything, mostly as modules. A kernel tailored for your specific hardware and needs will be much faster to build.

Also disabling building the _dbg package for the Debian build will significantly speed things up. Building that package takes a strangely long amount of time.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#314

Post by skinkestek »

Aurornis wrote: post #117
avidiax wrote: post #10

Employers, even the rich FANG types, are quite penny-wise and pound-foolish when it comes to developer hardware. Limiting the number and size of monitors. Putting speedbumps (like assessments or doctor's notes) on ergo accessories. Requiring special approval for powerful hardware. Requiring special approval for travel, and setting hotel and airfare caps that haven't been adjusted for inflation. To be fair, I know ple…

Every well funded startup I’ve worked for went through a period where employees could get nearly anything they asked for: New computers, more monitors, special chairs, standing desks, SaaS software, DoorDash when working late. If engineers said they needed it, they got it. Then some period of time later they start looking at spending in detail and can’t believe how much is being spent by the 25% or so who abuse the p…

2 things:

1. My brothers (I have a number of them) mostly work in construction somehow. It feels most of them drive a VW Transporter, a large pickup or something, each carrying at least $30 000 in equipment.

Seeing people I work with get laptops that use multiple minutes to connect to a postgres database that I connect to in seconds feels really stupid. (I'm old enough that I get what I need, they usually rather pay for a decent laptop rather than start a hiring process.)

2. My previous employer did something really smart:

They used to have a policy that you got a basic laptop and an inexpensive phone, but you could ask for more if you needed. Which of course meant some people got nothing and some people got custom keyboards and what not.

That was replaced with a $1000 budget on your first day an $800 every year that was meant to cover phones and everything you needed. You could alsp borrow from next year. So if someone felt they needed the newest iPhone or Samsung? Fine, save up one year(or borrow from next year) and you have it.

Others like me who don't care that much about phones could get a reasonably priced one + a gpod monitor for my upstairs office at home + some more gear.

And now the rules are the same for everyone so even I get (I feel I'm hopeless when it comes to arguing my case with IT, but now it was a simple: do you have money for it? yes/no)

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#315

Post by joshka »

At my former job at a FAANG, I did the math on allocating developers machines with 16GB vs 64GB based on actual job tasks with estimates of how much thumb twiddling waiting time that this would save and then multiplied that out by the cost of the developer's time. The cost benefit showed a reasonable ROI that was realized in Weeks for Senior dev salaries (months for juniors).

Based on this, I strongly believe that if you're providing hardware for software engineers, it rarely if ever makes sense to buy anything but the top spec Macbook Pro available, and to upgrade every 2-3 years. I can't comment on non desktop / non-mac scenarios or other job families. YMMV.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#316

Post by em3rgent0rdr »

2shortplanks wrote: post #3

This article skips a few important steps - how a faster CPU will have a demonstrable improvement on developer performance. I would agree with the idea that faster compile times can have a significant improvement in performance. 30s is long enough for a developer to get distracted and go off and check their email, look at social media, etc. Basically turning 30s into 3s can keep a developer in flow. The critical thing…

Another thing to keep in mind when compiling is adding more cores doesn't help with link time, which is usually stuck to a single core and can be a bottleneck.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#317

Post by dahart »

hulitu wrote: post #21
mgaunard wrote: post #4

I've seen more and more companies embrace cloud workstations. It is of course more expensive but that allows them to offer the latest and greatest to their employees without needing all the IT staff to manage a physical installation. Then your actual physical computer is just a dumb terminal.

> I've seen more and more companies embrace cloud workstations. In which movie ? "Microsoft fried movie" ? Cloud sucks big time. Not all engineers are web developers.

The comment wasn’t about web development. Lots of devs use TeamViewer / RDP / VNC / SSH, especially post-covid devs working remotely.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#319

Post by svantana »

joshka wrote: post #315

At my former job at a FAANG, I did the math on allocating developers machines with 16GB vs 64GB based on actual job tasks with estimates of how much thumb twiddling waiting time that this would save and then multiplied that out by the cost of the developer's time. The cost benefit showed a reasonable ROI that was realized in Weeks for Senior dev salaries (months for juniors). Based on this, I strongly believe that if…

No doubt the math checks out, but I wonder if developer productivity can be quantified that easily. I believe there's a lot of research pointing to people having a somewhat fixed amount of cognitive capacity available per day, and that aligns well with my personal experience. A lot of times, waiting for the computer to finish feels like a micro-break that saves up energy for my next deep thought process.

Re: It is worth it to buy the fast CPU

#320

Post by incone123 »

dcrazy wrote: post #278
incone123 wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mine is very stable. Top is just some kind of board. It took a bit of damage from my cat's claws but that's not a risk most corporate offices have.

What price point did you buy at? I paid a premium for my home height-adjustable desk because the frame and top are made in America, the veneer is much thicker than competitors, the motors and worm gears are reliable, and the same company makes coordinating office furniture. The same company sells cheap imported desks too. Since my work area is next to the dining table in my open-plan apartment, I considered the bette…

500 GBP in 2018. It looks functional but not stylish, which is all I needed. You make a good point about appearance: companies that want to create a certain impression for visitors are going to spring for better looking furniture.
Post reply on HN