Had another 48hr game jam this weekend...

[deadalnix]

On Tuesday, 17 September 2013 at 05:32:28 UTC, Manu wrote:
> In my experience, more memory == slower. If you care about 
> performance, the
> only time it's acceptable to use more memory is if your data 
> structures are
> as efficient as they can get, and the alternative is reading 
> off the hard
> drive.
> Bandwidth isn't free, cache is only so big, and logic to 
> process and make
> use of so much memory isn't free either. It usually just 
> suggests
> inefficient (or just lazy) data structures, which often also 
> implies
> inefficient processing logic.
> And the more memory an app uses, the higher chance of invoking 
> the page
> file, which is a mega-killer.
>

I do agree as this is generally true. However, the problem isn't 
really cache size or bandwidth, but rather latency. We know how 
to increase bandwith or cache size, but the first one come at a 
cost with no big benefit, and the second come at increase of cost 
and increase of latency. What is capping the perf here is really 
latency.

That being said, less memory == more of your working set in cache 
=> faster program.

> Dunno what to tell you. My VS instance is pretty light.
>

Yup, VS is one of these program that microsoft did better than 
the alternative :D

> I closed about half my open tabs after my last email (~50 left 
> open). Down
> to 93mb. You must all use some heavy plugins or something.
> My current solution has 10 projects, one is an entire game 
> engine with over
> 500 source files, hundreds of thousands of LOC. Intellisense 
> info for all
> of it... dunno what to tell you.
> Eclipse uses more than 4 times that much memory idling with no 
> project open
> at all...
>

4 times ? You must have a pretty light instance of eclipse !