HELP! Trying to understand the logic behind CPU core speeds and whole CPU speed.

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by dimon, Nov 9, 2006.

  1. dimon

    dimon Guest

    Hello All!

    I seemed to understand how Intel and AMD marked the speed of their
    processors until recently...
    OK, I got the marking of AMD's x000+ range. Their actual speed was
    lower in GHz but the output was that of a like for like in GHz terms.
    With the introduction of Dual Core architecture AMD was still marking
    their processors as xxxx+ (I have a dual core 4400+ AMD 64) then
    suddenly all those PLUS things have gone and we are back to pure GHz
    terms. But now my question is this:

    Does a Dual Core processor marked at 2.4GHz mean 2 x 2.4GHz OR 2 x
    1.2Ghz???


    Thanks for help.
    dimon, Nov 9, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. dimon

    Brian Guest

    "dimon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hello All!
    >
    > I seemed to understand how Intel and AMD marked the speed of their
    > processors until recently...
    > OK, I got the marking of AMD's x000+ range. Their actual speed was
    > lower in GHz but the output was that of a like for like in GHz terms.
    > With the introduction of Dual Core architecture AMD was still marking
    > their processors as xxxx+ (I have a dual core 4400+ AMD 64) then
    > suddenly all those PLUS things have gone and we are back to pure GHz
    > terms. But now my question is this:
    >
    > Does a Dual Core processor marked at 2.4GHz mean 2 x 2.4GHz OR 2 x
    > 1.2Ghz???
    >
    >
    > Thanks for help.
    >

    It means total speed, and fairly useless unless you have software to take
    advantage of the dual processor.
    Not much does at the moment so you are better sticking to a normal
    processor. It is faster!
    Brian, Nov 9, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. dimon

    dimon Guest

    It is for a server, so it would take advandage of separate cores.
    Thanks for your reply.


    Brian wrote:
    > "dimon" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Hello All!
    > >
    > > I seemed to understand how Intel and AMD marked the speed of their
    > > processors until recently...
    > > OK, I got the marking of AMD's x000+ range. Their actual speed was
    > > lower in GHz but the output was that of a like for like in GHz terms.
    > > With the introduction of Dual Core architecture AMD was still marking
    > > their processors as xxxx+ (I have a dual core 4400+ AMD 64) then
    > > suddenly all those PLUS things have gone and we are back to pure GHz
    > > terms. But now my question is this:
    > >
    > > Does a Dual Core processor marked at 2.4GHz mean 2 x 2.4GHz OR 2 x
    > > 1.2Ghz???
    > >
    > >
    > > Thanks for help.
    > >

    > It means total speed, and fairly useless unless you have software to take
    > advantage of the dual processor.
    > Not much does at the moment so you are better sticking to a normal
    > processor. It is faster!
    dimon, Nov 10, 2006
    #3
  4. dimon

    Fred Guest

    "dimon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hello All!
    >
    > I seemed to understand how Intel and AMD marked the speed of their
    > processors until recently...
    > OK, I got the marking of AMD's x000+ range. Their actual speed was
    > lower in GHz but the output was that of a like for like in GHz terms.
    > With the introduction of Dual Core architecture AMD was still marking
    > their processors as xxxx+ (I have a dual core 4400+ AMD 64) then
    > suddenly all those PLUS things have gone and we are back to pure GHz
    > terms. But now my question is this:
    >
    > Does a Dual Core processor marked at 2.4GHz mean 2 x 2.4GHz OR 2 x
    > 1.2Ghz???


    It is not just a matter of processor speed.
    The Core architecture introduces a number of technologies that make the core
    duo processors faster than those based on the older netburst architecture.
    Even the slowest core processors perform on par with the fastest of the
    netburst type in most situations.
    To oversimplify the situation let's just say that core features a shorter
    and wider pipeline, resulting in more things being done per clock cycle.
    Also a lot of effort has been put into ensuring that the pipeline remains
    full.
    For a thorough explanation of the differences please visit.
    http://www.behardware.com/articles/623-1/intel-core-2-duo-test.html
    Fred, Nov 10, 2006
    #4
  5. dimon

    dimon Guest

    Thank you for the reply and an interesting artice, however it applies
    to Intel cores and not to AMD cores.


    Fred wrote:
    > "dimon" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Hello All!
    > >
    > > I seemed to understand how Intel and AMD marked the speed of their
    > > processors until recently...
    > > OK, I got the marking of AMD's x000+ range. Their actual speed was
    > > lower in GHz but the output was that of a like for like in GHz terms.
    > > With the introduction of Dual Core architecture AMD was still marking
    > > their processors as xxxx+ (I have a dual core 4400+ AMD 64) then
    > > suddenly all those PLUS things have gone and we are back to pure GHz
    > > terms. But now my question is this:
    > >
    > > Does a Dual Core processor marked at 2.4GHz mean 2 x 2.4GHz OR 2 x
    > > 1.2Ghz???

    >
    > It is not just a matter of processor speed.
    > The Core architecture introduces a number of technologies that make the core
    > duo processors faster than those based on the older netburst architecture.
    > Even the slowest core processors perform on par with the fastest of the
    > netburst type in most situations.
    > To oversimplify the situation let's just say that core features a shorter
    > and wider pipeline, resulting in more things being done per clock cycle.
    > Also a lot of effort has been put into ensuring that the pipeline remains
    > full.
    > For a thorough explanation of the differences please visit.
    > http://www.behardware.com/articles/623-1/intel-core-2-duo-test.html
    dimon, Nov 10, 2006
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. bigal
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,100
    bigal
    Mar 22, 2006
  2. Xeno Chauvin

    Core speeds and memory speeds???

    Xeno Chauvin, Oct 3, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    481
    ┬░Mike┬░
    Oct 3, 2003
  3. jersie0
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    675
    -= Hawk =-
    Feb 24, 2004
  4. muzician21

    Trying to understand dual core processors

    muzician21, Mar 7, 2009, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    685
    muzician21
    Mar 11, 2009
  5. Jyoti Ballabh
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    1,864
    schultzeecs
    Nov 28, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page