4 ms·
> the only actual performance most consumers are likely to notice Remember when Apple made the Power Mac QUAD, to indicate that the system had FOUR processors,
by merdadicapra 5y ago
> the only actual performance most consumers are likely to notice
Remember when Apple made the Power Mac QUAD, to indicate that the system had FOUR processors, because "men should not live of single thread performance alone"?
> "With quad-core processing, a new PCI Express architecture and the fastest workstation card from Nvidia, the new Power Mac G5 Quad is the most powerful system we've ever made," Philip Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide product marketing, said in a statement.
Of course they can't advertise the multi core performances, because they are lower compared to similar systems, just like with the Power Mac they could not advertise that the system was greener, because it wasn't.
- astrange 5y agoThe multicore performance is good for a portable, because background threads can run on the efficiency cores without making the whole system thermal throttle. Intel can't do that.
- floatboth 5y agoNot right now, but the upcoming Intel thing will combine Atom cores and Core cores (lol) like that. AMD is the one left without an "efficiency core"… but I wouldn't be that surprised if they somehow manage to squeeze almost the same efficiency out of just low power modes on the same Zen core, which would leave them with better multi-core performance as usual.
- merdadicapra 5y agoI was literally saying the same thing, it's OP that said > M1 and follow-ups are about single thread performance, the only actual performance most consumers are likely to notice I beg to differ, multi core performances will be very much noticeable as well. Especially in this heavy media era video encoding, image editing, music production etc. are things that nowadays every kid does single core performances are good only for benchmarks and marketing