7 ms·
We dont need parallelism, we need performance. We have been sitting on 4GHz for the last 4 years now? Things like games require more and more cpu cycles, and th
by rasz_pl 12y ago
We dont need parallelism, we need performance. We have been sitting on 4GHz for the last 4 years now? Things like games require more and more cpu cycles, and the only way to add more is additional cores.
Linus post reads like he thinks there is a choice between fast fat cores versus lot of thin ones. There is no choice, there are no 6-8GHz cpus around the corner. We are where we are and there is only one way to "progress".
- szatkus 12y agoI'm not sure what you mean. Intel's Core progressed about 30-50% per clock performance during last 4 years (Nehalem -> Haswell).