Defconed

He seems to have the same issue as you do So you might as well take a look at it I gave him some ideas, you could also try it out

Hypothesis: CPU is fully loaded on 1 core, so single thread-IO is capped by CPU. 10% util on 4x E7 can roughly translate to 40% for a single CPU. iperf with 16threads does not translate into single thread IO perf. Suggestion: Check single core load when performing single-thread testing, try doing iperf on just -p 1 and see if it works just like file IO. PS: 1.Did you properly do the grounding on both ends for your Cat8 cable? if not this may contribute negatively. (See if both the NIC ports and the Eth jack has a piece of metal that should have contact when connected, if you don't see it on both ends you probably shouldn't use that cable.) You can buy affordable direct-attached SPF+ 10G modules with optic cables built into it. Downside is that is has limited length and choices, upside is that there's no optics connector and the module is cheap(it's used, of course) 2.I remembered something called RDMA for NIC, which should be turned on if you need 10G or 40Gig-ish, as their bandwidth could bring a CPU core to its knees. Are you sure this is configured?

What's wrong with the audio recently Nick's voice sounds like that someone +50% bass for his voice for most of the time And I can also observe that there're also similar audio glitches /or Linus sounds bad within other videos what's happening

Interesting, then fingerprint could be possible Welcome to the age of big data (selling your data)

Logging in is a supplement to cookie, did you do that?

Me personally is not living in an English speaking environment. From my observation, people used to call eGPU by its full name before the Apple showing off official eGPU solution, and everyone began calling it eGPU all at once I would call that a significant influence, sry that I forgot to mention this As Intel Ark says, 8250u units sells at 297$, while 8400H sells at 250$, this work for the same even for 6Gen and 7Gen dual core U series, I don't see that as a cost-down problem, doesn't make too much sense. It's gonna be easier to swallow it if you also stick to the opinion that "this saves power" Which I also don't know if saves any meaningful power consumption, I'd be glad to be able to see someone tossing some numbers to the table https://www.intel.ca/content/www/ca/en/io/thunderbolt/thunderbolt-3-usb-c-that-does-it-all-infographic.html?wapkw=thunderbolt&_ga=2.248076935.1037104860.1539652728-519787568.1529565926 Intel makes CPUs, Intel advertises TB3 with eGPU, Intel helps building thin&lights with TB3s You can't say that Intel doesn't have the big picture in mind, they surely do, but they rather not talk about it Which also leads to a new problem: did they claim that this "PCIe" is different in U series product page?( I didn't see it) On a desktop system, Techpowerup was testing all that through a desktop PCH only I've got people telling me that even the latency induced by PLX chips can hurt performance (>= 10%) So I wonder if HSIO Multiplexing and Thunderbolt3 makes the latency/overall performance worse This is also what I'm short on data As you can see, LTT observed quite more perf loss than Techpowerup, I'm interested in whether it's more CPU induced or link induced Perf don't run away for no reason right? Something must be happening

it can, mostly it doesn't, as far as i know Ad ID and major tracking stuff works with cookie, let's cut the primary source first

Apple does, single handedly making everyone calling it eGPU Again, I'm talking about the "all through the PCH" design on U series, I don't complain about desktop/HQ It's always nicer to have extra io, especially when it doesn't cost you in terms of money, that's why I'm mentioning Ryzen's extra lanes. Same logic applies for the PCH Hammering stuff, I do ask for a bit too much sometimes, I admit XD Like, I'm ok with PCH running all storage, even with NVMes But adding GPU through PCH? Ehhh probably no Which is the point of this thread: Why intel's doing it? Also what I'm curious about, I wonder how much is the CPU thing, and how much comes from bandwidth Does GPU actually gets that much bandwidth? And how's the latency? I can't tell (Latency does hurts performance

as the Techpowerup post I linked above, PCIe 8X sacrifices almost no performance(1%) even 4X didn't hurt more than something like 10% So this is also why I'm posting this thread: I doubt whether the actual bandwidth is even 4x or 2x Cuz the performance loss on eGPU, compared to the desktop alternative( Recent LTT Video) is almost 50% Ain't sure how much difference came from the CPU

To be honest, I won't even think about eGPU, I think is both expensive and not effective I opened this thread more on the side for a technical discussion, given that LTT recently mentioned about thin&lights with eGPU Someone would eventually choose this as a option, and TB3 it self is advertising eGPU as a selling point When they're advertising about it, why can't I dig into it, right? So even it seems a bit skeptical, I suppose discussing why such a performance loss existed will be valuable Ideology and practical use case aside, I'm just confused about why they're making PCIe coming out solely from PCH I mean, even desktop Ryzen provided additional 4x PCIe for NVMe storage, why would Intel going the other way? I just don't see the logic in this, and I'm hoping for a answer/disscussion

It depends On U series, everything ( DIMM not included, of course) comes out from the PCH(Chipset) On S series( desktop/HQ), it depends, certain notebooks chose PCH, few chose direct connect to CPU Problem is, on U series, everything can be grabbing that juicy 4GB/s throughput away from your (external or internal, Integrated doesn't count) GPU messing with bottlenecking even further As the link shown above, just a PCIe Gen3 x4 doesn't hurt performance that much So I supposed actual bandwidth is far less than that, given that NVMe storage also needs significant bandwidth

Intel claimed 40Gbps, and so does everything I see.. I'm not familiar with the 120b/128b sort of coding stuff.. so I usually just call it by its actual bandwidth( in GiB/GB)

the real disaster is that certain laptops actually put it to a static 2GB/s This also makes me wonder how much bandwidth ( for storage) do we actually needs

nope splitting is different desktop/ S series can only do 8+4+4 lanes distribution on direct lanes also, as someone mentioned above, does throwing all PCIe lanes over PCH helps saving power? PS: my wild guess is that 2700U should not be affected by this problem, I think I need a AMD Ark to confirm this

12lanes( in fact 16 HSIO lanes) through a 4GB/s bottleneck (shared with USB Ethernet storage and stuff) I wonder what's in Intel's mind when they designed this