American Express-Savings
PC hardware: 1.8 Ghz core 2 duo means 3.6 ghz???
1.8 Ghz core 2 duo means 3.6 ghz???
by Nitwit Tiwtin - 2/4/09 2:29 PMi have a few doubts:
does having a 1.8 Ghz core 2 duo processor mean 3.6 Ghz (pls forgive if this may seem stupid) since there are 2 proceesors (so 1.8+1.8)
i ask this because i have heard that a core 2 duo processor is better than an intel pentium 4 processor??
pls help thanks in advance
Clock speed isn't everything
by Steven Haninger - 2/4/09 3:21 PM In reply to: 1.8 Ghz core 2 duo means 3.6 ghz??? by Nitwit TiwtinHere's Intel's explanation
http://www.learningtools.arts.ubc.ca/tim/dualcore.swf
Basically more cores that can handle more software threads efficiently will get more done faster. Think of trying to take 8 people from N.Y. to L.A. Your choices are a 2 seater sports car that can go 120 mph and 9 passenger van that cruises best at 60. Which gets everyone to California first?
as if anyone really wants to go there. 
Nope
by Willy - 2/4/09 5:11 PM In reply to: 1.8 Ghz core 2 duo means 3.6 ghz??? by Nitwit TiwtinThink along the terms of having an extra pr. of hands. Not working faster by speed but rather having more hands to do the same task.
tada -----Willy
Core 2
by Phil Crase - 2/5/09 6:04 AM In reply to: 1.8 Ghz core 2 duo means 3.6 ghz??? by Nitwit TiwtinNope, liken to a 2 lane highway instead of a one, more data through 2 lanes than one, not a speed thing.
Right on the button
by hangtime31 - 2/14/09 9:14 AM In reply to: Core 2 by Phil CraseYou could use a lot of different stories to draw a comparison but the two lane highway is spot on. Nice one.
Yes
by 3rdalbum - 2/15/09 1:08 AM In reply to: Core 2 by Phil CraseIt's like transporting grain on a truck. If you wanted more grain to be delivered each day, you could increase the top speed of the truck... but there's a limit. Obviously, you can't make the truck go at 200mph.
So you hire another truck, and it doubles the amount of grain transported each day.
Let's say a new client urgently needs one truckload of grain. They need it RIGHT NOW. Even though you've got a second truck, you can't use it to make the grain arrive faster; you can only use it to increase the amount of grain you can carry in a day.
If you decided to branch out into transporting the space shuttle on the ground, you'd find that this is a task that only one truck can slowly do; NASA wouldn't let you disassemble the shuttle just to transport it a bit quicker.
This is how a multi-core processor works, basically. If you have a task that can be split up into two halves, then a 1.5GHz dual core will complete the task in the same amount of time as a 3GHz single core. If your task cannot be split up, then the 3GHz single core will be faster as the task will only use one of your cores. However, you could do two tasks at the same time to occupy both cores.
Multi-core vs. single-core
by OldNetDude - 2/16/09 8:54 AM In reply to: Yes by 3rdalbum3rdalbum has it right...if your OS or application was written/developed using only single-threaded functions, then the application is very likely to run much slower on a dual-core or any multi-core processor running at a slower core speed than it would on a faster single-core processor, because it will only run down one pipe.
And unfortunately, correct me if I am wrong anyone, but I believe that there are very few application written yet today that take full advantage of multi-threaded functions. Many of the OSs today are functioning fine with multi-threads, but that just means that the core OS will run faster, but that doesn't help a single-threded application any.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
