4 ms·

It’s not though in the server space. Many server workloads are inherently parallel because the support multiple concurrent users. Think database servers or web

• fulafel 6y ago
  The speed is strictly worse as no application works better in this scenario, and most are worse (latency).
  • tpxl 6y ago
    >strictly worse I'm pretty sure double the core count at 90% of the speed will get you better performance in _a lot_ of scenarios.
    • fulafel 6y ago
      By sustaining single core speedups, I meant big speedups, like we were observing bin the days before mainstream CPUs resorted to multiore. It was rather more than 10%. And we'd still have be able to make processors with lots of slow threads of course for applications where that's cost or power effective, that's comparatively very easy.
      • tpxl 6y ago
        Yes, having one core at 2x clock is definitely better than having two cores at 1x clock, I'd agree with that. These days however, the difference between fastest core performance on low-core processors and fastest core performance on high-core processors is rather a lot less than 50% (Comparing like for like, eg AMD to AMD and Intel to Intel).