[Dominicc2003]

Hi,
I was just wondering, If you see something that says "2.4ghz quad core", does it mean:

A) 4 * 2.4ghz processors (to make a total of 9.6ghz)
B) 4 * 0.6ghz processors (to make a total of 2.4ghz)
?


Thanks

[Advertisements]

One of the main reasons behind developing dual and quad cores was the recognition that going into higher clock is not a good solution, anymore, for increasing cpu performance mainly because of heat creation and increase in computing errors. The solution was to create paralle computing and use other technologies to gain improved computing power without increasing clock speed. Therefore when you see a dual core at 2.4G that is the speed of the entire cpu assembly which includes two cpus working in parallel. The same goes for quad which has 4 cpus working in parallel at 2.4 (or whatever) speed.

By the way, dual core doesn't give you two times the performance of a single core. Quad gives you even less added value then dual.

[The Skeptic]

One of the main reasons behind developing dual and quad cores was the recognition that going into higher clock is not a good solution, anymore, for increasing cpu performance mainly because of heat creation and increase in computing errors. The solution was to create paralle computing and use other technologies to gain improved computing power without increasing clock speed. Therefore when you see a dual core at 2.4G that is the speed of the entire cpu assembly which includes two cpus working in parallel. The same goes for quad which has 4 cpus working in parallel at 2.4 (or whatever) speed.

By the way, dual core doesn't give you two times the performance of a single core. Quad gives you even less added value then dual.

[Dominicc2003]

One of the main reasons behind developing dual and quad cores was the recognition that going into higher clock is not a good solution, anymore, for increasing cpu performance mainly because of heat creation and increase in computing errors. The solution was to create paralle computing and use other technologies to gain improved computing power without increasing clock speed. Therefore when you see a dual core at 2.4G that is the speed of the entire cpu assembly which includes two cpus working in parallel. The same goes for quad which has 4 cpus working in parallel at 2.4 (or whatever) speed.

By the way, dual core doesn't give you two times the performance of a single core. Quad gives you even less added value then dual.

Ah ok, thanks for clearing that up for me!
So (in your opinion) do you think that CPUs aren't going to get much faster (as in GHz) in the future but will include many more cores? Or do you think that CPUs will go above and beyond 4GHz but only when there are more cores integrated and the hear problem is sorted?

[The Skeptic]

What I wrote here is the briefest summary of what I read in Scientific American some two years ago. The biggest problem for traditional cpus development became heat generation and removal. The designers came to the conclusion that keeping clocking to higher level with present materials and technology create serious problem. It seems that near future developments will concentrate on multi-core cpus that work in parallel and have other features that make better use of the cpu. At the the same time development concentrate on making the chips smaller, denser and cooler. In the long run other entirely, presently exotic, technologies will replace the traditional silicon chips.