# Is this NUMA test result real?

**URL:** <https://forum.autonomys.xyz/t/is-this-numa-test-result-real/2323>\
**Category:** Support\
**Created:** [January 3, 2024, 7:24am UTC](https://forum.autonomys.xyz/t/is-this-numa-test-result-real/2323 "2024-01-03T07:24:33Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![nazar-pc](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/forum.autonomys.xyz/nazar-pc/32/6_2.png) [@nazar-pc](https://forum.autonomys.xyz/u/nazar-pc)\
**Post date:** [January 7, 2024, 3:46pm UTC](https://forum.autonomys.xyz/t/is-this-numa-test-result-real/2323/21 "2024-01-07T15:46:15Z")

</div>

It is a typo in the code that will be fixed in the next release

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![z\_W](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/forum.autonomys.xyz/z_w/32/1135_2.png) [@z\_W](https://forum.autonomys.xyz/u/z_W)\
**Post date:** [January 7, 2024, 3:49pm UTC](https://forum.autonomys.xyz/t/is-this-numa-test-result-real/2323/22 "2024-01-07T15:49:01Z")

</div>

The latest version has greatly optimized the handling of EPYC processors, which have 8 NUMA nodes, but I have some Intel Xeon Platinum processors with only two NUMA nodes, yet a very high number of cores, and the optimization results for these are not very satisfactory.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![nazar-pc](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/forum.autonomys.xyz/nazar-pc/32/6_2.png) [@nazar-pc](https://forum.autonomys.xyz/u/nazar-pc)\
**Post date:** [January 7, 2024, 4:01pm UTC](https://forum.autonomys.xyz/t/is-this-numa-test-result-real/2323/23 "2024-01-07T16:01:07Z")

</div>

Well, in upcoming release you’ll be able to just specify number of farms and it will adjust more things more carefully, but it is up to you and other users to help us understand what config works better so we can make out of the box experience even better.

[Previous page](https://forum.autonomys.xyz/t/is-this-numa-test-result-real/2323.md?page=1)