PDA

View Full Version : Gigahertz?


ZacTheZebra
April 18th, 2016, 04:36 PM
How do you guys feel about gigahertz in processors it has really been forgotten about intel and AMD have flagships clocked at around 3.5-4.00 GHz do you think we need to start getting more like 7 andthings considering we're in 2016?

jdhud024
April 18th, 2016, 08:25 PM
It depends on what you're doing, as having a higher-clocked dual-core processor will perform better at single thread tasks than a lower-clocked quad-core processor will. At the same time, that same lower-clocked quad-core processor will perform much better in multi-thread tasks than that same higher-clocked dual-core processor.

Basically, I feel like it depends really on whether you need more cores for faster multi-thread tasks or whether you need higher clock speeds for faster single-thread tasks. This is also why I like the 2.7 GHz dual-core Core i5 in my MacBook Pro, I do more single-thread tasks than multi-thread tasks, so I can get by having two cores at 2.7 GHz that will clock up to 3.1 GHz when needed.

Andyyy95
April 19th, 2016, 12:56 PM
I use Intel Quad Core i5 3.1Hz on my PC. It's more than enough power for the tasks/games I normally run.

Endeavour
April 19th, 2016, 01:42 PM
My Macbook Air is 1.6ghz, and that is absolutely fine for what I do (not much, but stuff like music,videos and homework)

Reise
April 20th, 2016, 01:26 AM
The issue is that such a high clock speed requires a very good cooling system, which is impossible to implement in laptops except for a few hardcore ones.
This is also the reason why dual and quad-core processors started to appear.

Typhlosion
April 24th, 2016, 02:08 PM
It doesn't make too much sense talking in clock frequencies anymore. Before, processor competitors were rivaling to reach the highest clock speeds. See the myth on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megahertz_myth)