![]() ![]() Yes, under the right circumstances you could do it with a normal connection by having it process something in the browser tab, but if you are doing that enough to flood a lot of cores I have to wonder what the heck are you doing and why are you doing it in a browser instead of something far more efficient. Why are you loading that many tabs at once but also, where is that data going to come from? I have an NVME ssd that flows 2500MBps, that's equal to 250,000 gigabit ethernet connections to the internet (if my math is right) and even that has trouble flooding my cpu in most instances. Now, before you start saying "well then obviously more cores is better", stop and think about that. Once the pages finish loading the cores will go idle so you can have 200 pages open and still only use a single core or you can open 200 pages at once and it will use all your cores until those 200 pages are loaded then go back to just one core. If you have 5 pages the browser uses one core and the pages can each use a core, but if you load the browser with 2 pages it's only going to use 3 (one for the browser 1 for each page). The number matters little, it's what's in them that matters, but we'll get to that in a moment.Ĭhrome the browser itself uses one core, and only one core. I've had 250 open in FF and I've heard of others using that in Chrome. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |