Quad core 2.5GHz = 10GHz processor?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
The person you are dealing with is suffering AICKDS (Aquired Immune Computer Knowledge Deficiency Syndrome)....this conditiom is at the moment not curable and many at times people can go for years and years without any outwards symptoms or knowledge of the disease, many GPU and CPU lives have been lost as a result of this incurable disease....it's unfortunate really
 
wait....

you mean... I have a 12ghz cpu!?!?!

seriously though, I see this all the time on ebay especially. I think people buy into it too because they don't know any better. ( need.... more... mega hurtz!!! )

This is as bad as the people who sell "Lightning Fast Dell..... pentium 4 systems" that sell like hot cakes @ well above market value because people see the Lightning Fast, and think they're getting something special.
 

At Costco (maybe elsewhere) the trial software on the HP computers boasts "More gigahertz = faster computer". That pisses me off.
 
That cake idea is a good 1.

I have a similar version.

4 lane freeway. You max speed is 100Kph on 4 lanes. The AMOUNT of traffic on the four lanes at any 1 time can ONLY travel at 100Kph. If you made it a 1 lane freeway, you still only TRAVEL at 100Kph. IT doesn't mean that you went from 4 to 1 the speed limit is now 400kph. (Although that would be nice).
 
Or as someone else put it: If a car can travel at 100mph and has 4 wheels, the car must be capable of travelling at 400mph!

It makes perfect sense. I can see no flaws whatsoever in the statement! 😀
 
Well, you are all wrong. The problem is the access to memory. One CPU can access memory at maximum memory speed. Two or more have to share memory, which causes interference and thus loss in throughput. We are getting into queuing theory here. Mainframe manufacturers went through this problem about 40 years ago, and Tandem computers solved (almost perfectly) the problem with a new technology called messaging. Individual CPUs had their dedicated memory, and the sharing of information was done via fast messaging between CPUs. Tandem systems were the only ones in the industry that scale, meaning that for each added CPU you got almost 100% additional throughput. This is an expensive solution, and no PC operating system I know can use it, therefore we are again dealing with a 40 year old problem. Ask HP which acquired Tandem via Compaq if they would release the NonStop operating system for PC use, then find someone to port all PC software to NonStop... it is probably not going to happen.
So live with the fact that the number of CPUs for PCs will stay low. When you get to 8 cores, the 8th core adds only about 10% more CPU power.
Now to a more relevant example for the problem: Lines at the grocery store. The cashier is the memory, the shopper is the CPU. 4 people in line (4 CPUs). When one shopper is served, all others have to wait, since there is only one line (memory). The other shoppers have to wait and, being CPUs, are useless while the memory serves one CPU. In a computer it works because the CPU is way faster than memory and accesses memory only to fetch a small amount (into the cache) and while that CPU is processing the information in the cache, another CPU can access the memory. Get the picture? Memory is a huge bottleneck, and all CPUs could hum away if they only had their own dedicated memory (cashier). So lets open three more registers and all shoppers will be out in a flash...:)
 
facepalm.jpg


No, not really true at all :pfff:
If this where true you would see massive increases in performance when running faster RAM (which you do not).
 
dead thread walking..... :pfff:

however we cant blame average joe for their stupidity about not knowing computer. to most of average joe/jane a computer is merely just mouse and monitor....(many of them amount us still dont know how to type/use keyboard...not to mention open computer case to see what it is..)
 
One of my friends purchased a laptop because it had a sticker which said "Can play Gears of War 2" on it... I face-palmed...

And then I ask the specs and it turned out to be a several year old machine which weighed a ton and used old parts... I face-palmed again...

The average consumer pretty much has to have their computer purchasing decisions done for them by someone who actually knows computers, be it an honest salesman, a friend, or someone on forums such as these.
 


I would say if the program could actually utilize each core to its potential and the RAM as well then it would be like that.

But since most programs are pretty poorly coded, even with multicore support they tend to be pretty bad in performance increases.
 


but without these idiot contributing their stupidity i think many of company may go bankrupt as the gross revenue would be a lot lower. i think it would be turn into worst nightmare for these oem to survive if many people suddunly become smart like us....

btw how old is it in the laptop!? if it says that can run gears of war it may be actually run it!!(barely......2~4fps....)
 
Well since Gears of War 2 came out a bit over a year ago, I'm pretty sure they stuck that sticker on after the laptop had been sitting on the shelf for a bit more than a year. It also only had integrated graphics, so I bet it could barely run it.
 



if it said to be laid in the shelf for over a year then chance are high the igp may be either gma 3100/x3100, geforce 6050/7050 or deltachrome 9. so which it can capable to run gears of war 2 but it wont be playable that's for sure.

that also happan on some graphic card that paste a tick says to be able to run crysis(dont ask how) but when you look at the specification you'll realize they are only "capable" to run it, doesn't mean it will be playable....it's commonly seem on hd 3200/4200 and geforce 8400/9400 with 32/64bit buswidth....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom