3 ms·
Do you define "brawny" via higher clock frequency or more internal logic (out-of-order execution,prefetching,etc) or both? I would say "both". > Faster process
by qznc 14y ago
Do you define "brawny" via higher clock frequency or more internal logic (out-of-order execution,prefetching,etc) or both? I would say "both".
> Faster processors are exactly as slow as slower processors when they're stalled - say, because of waiting for memory;
But they might not wait as often, because they have bigger caches, better prefetching logic, etc.
> Many slow processors are actually faster than few fast ones when stalled, because they're waiting in parallel;
Only if your memory supports those parallel accesses. If the memory access is a bottleneck, they might just as well wait for each other.
> All this on top of area & power savings of many wimpy cores compared to few brawny ones.
The "brawny" cores still have a lot of room to improve their power saving.
This fight is not over. I believe reality just stay complex and the answer will be "it depends" forever.
- _yosefk 14y agoOf course this fight is not over, and I agree with your points to some degree or other (especially "they might not wait as often" - memory access being the bottleneck is in my experience less likely for a moderately sized multi-CPU system; and as to room to improve power savings - muscle needs calories :) In fact my point was only that fight is never over, as a counterpoint to "brawny cores beat wimpy cores most of the time" - not that the reverse statement is true.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]