I have noticed that most processors do not exceed about 4.5 GHz, is that the maximum number of GHz you can have in one processor? Also, how many processors can you pack together in one "clump" there are duo-cores and quad-cores but what about tri-cores, and hex-cores and such?
Note that both CPUs have the same clock speed but the Core i5 is nearly 20 times faster overall - close to 5 times the performance per core - and still nearly 3 times faster on a single thread, and all that for only 40% more power consumed; this is all because of various improvements to how they process things (the past 9 years have also seen improvements to other system components, such as memory speed, which can easily bottleneck performance; even current DDR4 memory is extremely slow compared to CPU execution times so they add lots of very fast cache memory to CPUs). Also, note that the overall score does not necessarily reflect the performance that you'll achieve in a given program; for example, Minecraft mainly depends on the performance of a single core when performing server-side work and client-side rendering (a singleplayer client can effectively use two cores but each core only handles one of the aforementioned).
I have noticed that most processors do not exceed about 4.5 GHz, is that the maximum number of GHz you can have in one processor? Also, how many processors can you pack together in one "clump" there are duo-cores and quad-cores but what about tri-cores, and hex-cores and such?
Just curious, that's all.
How is GHz not a good indicator of performance? If it isn't what is?
Just curious, that's all.
Look up POWER8 servers, their processors can apparently go up to 5Ghz.
무세이 알렉스, remember the name.
Here is a good example, of why GHz is not a good measure of performance:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/
Note that both CPUs have the same clock speed but the Core i5 is nearly 20 times faster overall - close to 5 times the performance per core - and still nearly 3 times faster on a single thread, and all that for only 40% more power consumed; this is all because of various improvements to how they process things (the past 9 years have also seen improvements to other system components, such as memory speed, which can easily bottleneck performance; even current DDR4 memory is extremely slow compared to CPU execution times so they add lots of very fast cache memory to CPUs). Also, note that the overall score does not necessarily reflect the performance that you'll achieve in a given program; for example, Minecraft mainly depends on the performance of a single core when performing server-side work and client-side rendering (a singleplayer client can effectively use two cores but each core only handles one of the aforementioned).
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumHeck don't even need anything that fancy, my gaming box runs at 5.2ghz.