I took the time out of my hands to register on this web site, and finally ask this question from people that actually know much more than I do.
Here is the phenomenon I'm talking about; this quote from an article I just read describes it best: "With the gigahertz race largely abandoned, both AMD and Intel are trying to pack more cores onto a die in order to continue to improve processing power and aid with multitasking operations"
This is what I don't understand; I thought that the reason why they keep on making new CPUs, and keep on trying to advance them was to make them faster (most importantly)!
I don't know, but under my impression, and, also, from what I've seen, the larger the number of GHz that a processor has, the faster the processer is. So, why are they abandoning increasing GHz clock speeds? I truthfully think it's because they might just not know how to make them faster using their current methods, maybe they're hoping that this multi-core idea will lead them to new ideas towards increasing clock speeds once again.
Whatever the reason is, truthfully I don't actually believe that these new multi-core CPUs are actually any bit faster at all, like for say, a 3 GHz Pentium 4 from 2002, is basically just as fast as a 3 GHz Intel Quad Core CPU from 2008. That is my impression, and I'll get to that in one second.
But, I just want to hear from somebody that really knows what they're talking about if there is an actual speed increase of a type or form that I don't know about, or haven't realized.
All I know is, as long as I'm under the impression that there is no actual speed increase between a 3 GHz CPU made nearly 7 years ago, and one from today of the same speed, but, more cores, I will never EVER buy a brand new processor again, I guess there are some good sides to that, buying a CPU will be cheaper for me, because I won't be buying the newest one, when the one made 7 years ago is just as good, and far less expensive. All I know is, when I upgrade my CPU, I only do it when I want to achieve a faster machine, but with no speed increases, the only incentive for me to buy a piece of new CPU technology is when I buy a new laptop, because laptops always have the newest stuff.
All I do know FOR A FACT is that my brother just got a new laptop with a Quad Core Intel chip that has the exact same clock speed as the single core AMD inside my year old laptop, 2.2 GHz, and, from using his laptop, and comparing it to mine, there is ABSOLUTELY NO NOTICEABLE performance increase AT ALL!! So, things like that are what have formed my opinion on this. But now, I just want to hear some professional perspective.
Here is the phenomenon I'm talking about; this quote from an article I just read describes it best: "With the gigahertz race largely abandoned, both AMD and Intel are trying to pack more cores onto a die in order to continue to improve processing power and aid with multitasking operations"
This is what I don't understand; I thought that the reason why they keep on making new CPUs, and keep on trying to advance them was to make them faster (most importantly)!
I don't know, but under my impression, and, also, from what I've seen, the larger the number of GHz that a processor has, the faster the processer is. So, why are they abandoning increasing GHz clock speeds? I truthfully think it's because they might just not know how to make them faster using their current methods, maybe they're hoping that this multi-core idea will lead them to new ideas towards increasing clock speeds once again.
Whatever the reason is, truthfully I don't actually believe that these new multi-core CPUs are actually any bit faster at all, like for say, a 3 GHz Pentium 4 from 2002, is basically just as fast as a 3 GHz Intel Quad Core CPU from 2008. That is my impression, and I'll get to that in one second.
But, I just want to hear from somebody that really knows what they're talking about if there is an actual speed increase of a type or form that I don't know about, or haven't realized.
All I know is, as long as I'm under the impression that there is no actual speed increase between a 3 GHz CPU made nearly 7 years ago, and one from today of the same speed, but, more cores, I will never EVER buy a brand new processor again, I guess there are some good sides to that, buying a CPU will be cheaper for me, because I won't be buying the newest one, when the one made 7 years ago is just as good, and far less expensive. All I know is, when I upgrade my CPU, I only do it when I want to achieve a faster machine, but with no speed increases, the only incentive for me to buy a piece of new CPU technology is when I buy a new laptop, because laptops always have the newest stuff.
All I do know FOR A FACT is that my brother just got a new laptop with a Quad Core Intel chip that has the exact same clock speed as the single core AMD inside my year old laptop, 2.2 GHz, and, from using his laptop, and comparing it to mine, there is ABSOLUTELY NO NOTICEABLE performance increase AT ALL!! So, things like that are what have formed my opinion on this. But now, I just want to hear some professional perspective.