the truth about multiple cores and processor speeds

[dafink]

I've been reading conflicting reports on this but i'm not sure what the answer is, unless it depends who you ask.

For a long time as everyone knows, processor speed determined how good a pc was. Having a fast computer with enough RAM was great, but mhz and then ghz were everything.

Now with multiple cores, i've heard this doesn't matter as much anymore. Multiple cores can handle different tasks, so how fast a processor can go doesn't mean as much since it's not one processor handling everything.

Prices for 2ghz dual/quad core aren't bad, but go to 3ghz and the price jumps to $1000 and way over.

Is processor speed becoming less important now? It'll always be important i'm sure, but what level is it at now and is it worth all that extra cash?

[George Hallam]

Im not that technical at it but Ghz still matters alot, (it doesn't work this way but) think of it as

2Ghz monocore 1 x 2 = 2Ghz
2Ghz Dualcore 2x2 = 4Ghz
2Ghz Quadcore 4x2 = 8Ghz

3Ghz monocore 1 x 3 = 3Ghz
3Ghz Dualcore 2x3 = 6Ghz
3Ghz Quadcore 4x3 = 12Ghz

look at the difference in speeds that extra Ghz makes,

Ghz is how many calculations are done a second
1 Hz = 1 calculation per second
1 Khz = 1,000 calculations per second
1 Mhz = 1,000,000 calculations per second
1 Ghz = 1,000,000,000 calculations per second

The architecture and size of the CPU depend on how effectively it carries out the calculations. (wheres saph when you need him :rolleyes:)
If you look at some charts on toms hardware you will how much the extra Mhz/Ghz do. Thats why people OC.

[mjc]

There are a lot of factors involved, but the overall truth is, while raw speed still matters, it isn't the only factor that determines how good a machine is. The number of cores is almost as important as the speed. Remember, though, not all software can take advantage of more than one core...

I've seen some benchmarks where they run two CPU intensive tasks at the same time (theoretically, with a quad core you could do four) and both complete as fast or faster than one of the same tasks on a same speed single core processor.

This is usually because the manufacturing process for the multi-cores uses smaller sizes, The CPU usually has larger caches than the single core. And a few other factors...

Also, those cores are not working sequentially, but in parallel...so it is more like 4 3 GHz computers working on the same task together, splitting the load.

Besides, Intel needs something to set the price points with and for the most part consumers understand 'speed'...:D

[dafink]

Good that sets the record straight on that.

I was wondering since there's such a price difference once you hit 3ghz. Guess the higher price does pay off in the end.

Btw George, WHAT is jiggyville? It looks like some shockwave version of Sim City or something, I miss that game.

[George Hallam]

im not 100% sure, i was at school one day bord in my IT class and i tried to look for a cool flash game and that came up :p

The more people view your page the bigger it gets :D

my mate Ajmukonhas one too
http://mukon.myminicity.com/

[Ajmukon]

Btw George, WHAT is jiggyville? It looks like some shockwave version of Sim City or something, I miss that game.
its a measure of how many friends you have. :p ;)


As to the "Cores" A 1.6 GHz Dual core will beat a 3.0 Ghz Pentium 4 (maybe not HT version)

[George Hallam]

its a measure of how many friends you have. :p ;)



and at current im 18 friends ahead :p ;)

[dafink]

LOL it's pretty cool....first I thought it was something like Sim City but I couldn't figure out where the controls were for it.

I have another XP-related question I might as well ask here.

Every time I restart the folder "system32" loads. I found the support page at MS for fixing this and I saw there's also a program to do it. Which would you suggest and how do I go about fixing it?