How fast can a computer count to a billion?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 20 жов 2024
- How fast can you count? Well, compared to you, a computer can count much faster. Watch the video to find out how fast a computer can count to a billion!
Credits:
Music:
Wallpaper Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
creativecommons...
Ain't no way bro did it in python 💀💀
ehm, if you use such simple counting method instead of an async loop without if or < in while statements (/partiz.), then the result will be as slow as this. Meaning that if it's optimized, it will count to around a billion within one second - in Python, already showing contrast to the result here. Furthermore, the perfomance compared of Python to for example C++ is ~1:600 as of right now, so when switching to it and if everything was really well done, then it should give you 500bil-1.5tril per second. Not intending to be condescending, but people may assume that computers aren't that fast when seeing it.
Thanks for the feedback! I didn't know there was such a thing as async loop until you mentioned it. I looked it up, and I see what you mean. It will definitely make it run faster. However, I'm just a beginner at coding, so I don't quite know how to implement it. Anyways, I'll look more into these advanced coding techniques when I have time.
The purpose of this video was not to find the fastest time in which a computer can count to a billion, but rather show the insane speed at which modern computers run.
That being said, thanks again for your feedback! 😀
i'm no expert on this but 500bil-1.5tril per second seems very high? How is that possible when a processors clock rate is only in the 5billion operations per second range?
I'm watching this video to get an idea of how efficient a computer is for doing calculations in it's tick cycle, (see how many cycles to do a very basic calculation) I would certainly not expect it to be above the clock cycle of processor.
You seem very I hope you're right, could you please explain a little for me?
@@bobnob4393 K, take some current CPU model, presumably 4Ghz clock speed and 16 cores, 4bil operations per core, 64bil operations for the cpu per second. Depending on how we define "counting", if we maintain the perception of having a number increasing by 1 in a chronological order and with an interval between each operation greater than 0s, then 64bil operations will be the maximum. If you further increase the efficiency by running multiple more counting steps in parallel on a single core using out-of-order execution, you can multiply the speed by a magnitude, although it's hard to estimate it even for the most basic operations and bit manipulations. Essentially consider it counting in parallel in parallel whilst still preserving the individual steps of counting themselves, it's not turning into the addition of greater values than 1 to increase speed. Of course this experiment would also assume that we at least created an environment which doesn't rely on integer operations, this would only throttle efficiency.
if java == "javascript":
print("java is javascript")
elif java != "javascript":
print("Bro said hes gonna use javascript but instead used java which you can see bc javascript scripts end with .js and java script with .java")
also you can do
System.out.println("Example");
So you dont have to add the
When will u keep new video ?
Idk
If you could count day and night, one number per second, it would take 37 yrs to billion... Not realistical but the maximum theoretical.
Yeah, it's basically impossible, because we need more than 1 second to count large numbers, and we can't count for 24 hours a day. And why would anyone waste their life counting numbers ?
Wow
It is not kinemaster!!!
Yes, it's Lightworks..on computer 😀
good video
Thanks
Hey genius
This msg will get pinned by Tuhil
Hi! 😀
@@tuhilsd.i.yscience2736 hi dudr