single-threaded

GUIs is a poor example as they are inherently single-threaded frontends so performing simultaneous actions is already often implemented utilizing message-passing to backend threads which report back to a single-threaded event-loop.

Redis is a single-threaded server and shared databases, well, share the same process.

What kind of sane person could design a single-threaded, single process database?

I bet the same programmer would have made a mess of a single-threaded app as well.

Insertion time averaged at ~2.5 seconds(!) These documents were very small, and the insert operations were single-threaded, so the write lock wasn't an issue.

I am not sure what the cost is of the cache coherency hardware, but if it were high, then presumably single-core CPUs would have a big advantage on single-threaded workloads.

How would you deal with JavaScript's single-threaded, single-process model of execution?

Browsers don't support WebCL yet and their asm.js is single-threaded.

Power consumption aside, and given that the E6600 could be overclocked to ~4GHz in 2007, how far have we come in single-threaded perf?

In addition, now your processing bottleneck becomes how fast your single-threaded parent process can deserialise the responses (which in Python in particular can really be quite slow).

I'd really like to see extensive single-threaded benchmarks normalised over clock frequency.

Simple single-threaded message processors have straightforward logic.

Faster than "the single-threaded C version." I found this a bit shocking - on a 32-core machine, this is an achievement?

Single-threaded performance is still the king.