3 ms·
That's not true. E cores on desktop Alder Lake mostly allow for higher multithread performance for a given amount of silicon. At desktop part power limits they
by tyrfing 5y ago
That's not true. E cores on desktop Alder Lake mostly allow for higher multithread performance for a given amount of silicon. At desktop part power limits they are run so high that they don't allow for more work per power budget, and they don't have any advantage apart from cost. This will probably change in the future with higher core counts, but for now E cores have no real advantage outside low power laptop parts.
https://chipsandcheese.com/2022/01/28/alder-lakes-power-efficiency-a-complicated-picture/ https://chipsandcheese.com/2022/01/28/alder-lakes-power-effi...
- zozbot234 5y agoThat article still shows E-cores as being more efficient for most of their clock speed range. They may lose out to P-cores at 3.5GHz+ clock speeds, but these speeds are very rare nowadays. You'd have to run a compute intensive workload that pegs both P- and E-cores to run into the issue.
- makomk 5y agoThey had to manually underclock the E-cores to get better efficiency than the P-cores, which isn't surprising; Intel's power management has historically been based around the idea of "race to idle" - running at a high speed so you could complete the task faster and shut off the CPU sooner. AMD makes heavy use of downclocking their cores but this causes all kinds of headaches with performance regressions on real loads because of course it's not possible to predict in advance how much CPU time arbitrary code will need.