4 ms·
you misread computing power as CPU clock speed
by mapleoin 13y ago
you misread computing power as CPU clock speed
- Aardwolf 13y agoNo I didn't. Intel desktop CPUs did not gain a significant amount of computing power the last 3 years. Compare 1995 CPUs to 1998. Now compare 2010 CPUs to 2013.
- mapleoin 13y agothink parallel
- Aardwolf 13y agoYes, they had 4-core CPUs in 2006, and still have 4-core CPUs in 2013 (with a few rare xeon 6-cores).
- skorgu 13y agoYou can get 8-core Xeons (X7550 to pick a random one) and 16-core Opterons (6378 for example). More importantly 2013 Xeons do much more per clock cycle than 2006 Xeons (and 2013 Opterons for that matter). Improvements in pipelining, branch prediction, caches, etc are harder to nail down to one number like clock speed or core count but can be huge contributors to real-world performance.
- wtallis 13y agohttp://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/701?vs=191 http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/701?vs=191 That's a big enough difference to count as significant. Especially when you consider that Intel's been lowering their power budget and spending larger portions of their transistor budget on the integrated GPU. The Pentiums on the market in 1995 were 10-12W, and the Pentium 2s on the market in 1998 were 30-45W followed by a die shrink that brought power back down to 20-30W.