Understanding CPU Tech Specs

When looking at multi-core processors what does the clock speed refer to (e.g. Intel? Core? i7-2820QM processor 2.30 GHz with Turbo Boost 2.0 up to 3.40 GHz)? Does it refer to the overall processor's clock speed or just the individual clock speed for each core?

Not something that I know an awful lot about but these explain a bit about it.

http://computershopper.com/feature/cpu-cache-clock-speed-and-bus-explained

It seems some however have now stopped using clock speed as a way of advertising how 'good' their products are

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-clock-speed.htm

According to Intel Turbo Boost Technology adjusts the CPU timing of all cores depending on it's demand.

So basically your CPU normally runs at 2.30GHz however when in demand i.e. running Adobe Flash the CPU may operate at 3.40GHz

Richard S.

Some general reference information here, courtesy of Piriform Forum members: http://forum.piriform.com/index.php?showtopic=30313&st=0

More CPU comparisons at cpubenchmark and at tomshardware.

So from the website Hazelnut linked I would take the 2.3 GHz in my example to refer to the overall processor clock speed. Correct inference? Anyway, this thread was prompted by another recent one and the following statement:

Specs are: 1.66 GHZ dual core Celeron Atom chipset, 128 MB Integrated Video Ram, 1 GB RAM, 160 GB HDD, WiFi, 10.1 in screen etc...

followed by a reply from the OP

Well, this is a dual core atom processor, so instead of 1.66, it is 3.32 GHZ.

Is the latter comment correct? From what I inferred it seems incorrect.

@login123: When I click on the link to the forum thread you linked it returns to this one, is that supposed to happen?

...

@login123: When I click on the link to the forum thread you linked it returns to this one, is that supposed to happen?

No, wrong link, sorry, I fixed it, try again maybe? Duhhh, early here, need coffee.

Well, this is a dual core atom processor, so instead of 1.66, it is 3.32 GHZ.

Most applications are complied for single core operation only multi-core aware applications can use all available cores to make the above claim they're running at twice the clock speed.

So to say a 1.66GHz dual core runs at 3.32GHz is nonsense it depends on the Operating System and the application you're using.

Richard S.

Most applications are complied for single core operation only multi-core aware applications can use all available cores to make the above claim they're running at twice the clock speed.

In general I would avoid multi-core applications.

With a single core processor I have on rare occasions seen Comodo seize 100% of the single core whilst doing a "background" A.V. update,

and when it was bad I could move the mouse but not achieve any clicks or keyboard actions.

Now with Quad core the A.V. update seizes one core. That leaves me with 3 cores and 75% available CPU cycles. Sweet.

Most compellingly :-

When I run a VB script it works sweetly apart from a 5 Second hang-up that repeats at 33 second intervals - absolutely repeatable.

If I disconnect the Ethernet link to the router the hang-up stops.

Conclusion :- the Windows cscript engine tries to phone home and Comodo blocks it as per instructions.

Simultaneously a BAT script repeatedly issues a sequence of PING commands at 1 second intervals,

and never suffers a hang-up even whilst Comodo is blocking outgoing from cscript.

Conclusion :-

If a multi-core aware application can grab all cores,

your keyboard and mouse may be totally disregarded until it is done,

and if all cores perform suspicious action any effective malware protection will fight all such cores to a standstill.

Well, this is a dual core atom processor, so instead of 1.66, it is 3.32 GHZ.

Is the latter comment correct? From what I inferred it seems incorrect.

It is essentially the same.

1 core running at 3.32 GHZ should theoretically finish a job in about the same time as spreading the job to 2 cores having 1.66 GHZ each.

The trick here is, you would then have to do an in depth comparison of a lot of other things, such as:

- L1, L2, L3 Cache -> Do the 1.66 GHZ cores share a bigger cache set than the single chip you refer to? Example: P4 = 2 MB cache / Celeron = 512 KB. P4 wins!

- Applications that formerly utilized 100% of a single core, may not be optimized for dual. Thus, your application may run a bit slower, but Windows may run a bit smoother since it has more reserve left over because of this.

Overall, I would much prefer a dual core over a single core, because work loads seem to be better balanced overall.

I theorize that having 2 identical processor cores also enables higher throughput due to double the bandwidth.

1 CPU can only handle just so much throughput, so if you use a second one, even if it is at 1/2 the clock speed, if all else is about identical, & it has about the same amount of throughput handling as a single core, then the dual core should handle bigger chunks of data much easier without bogging down.

I have used single vs dual core, & dual cores definitely seem to handle bigger throughput better & more easily than a single core can.

When looking at multi-core processors what does the clock speed refer to (e.g. Intel® Core™ i7-2820QM processor 2.30 GHz with Turbo Boost 2.0 up to 3.40 GHz)? Does it refer to the overall processor's clock speed or just the individual clock speed for each core?

If I am correct, I believe this simply means that you have a 3.4 GHZ processor that runs at the reduced rate of 2.30 GHZ as part of the intel strategy to provide a chip that can operate with a longer battery life, while retaining the power to flip/switch to the higher clock speed when needed.

The theory is that 2.30 would be adequate for most situations, but when needed, the chip would flip up to 3.4.

The clock speed refers to all cores, since all cores are capable of 3.4 GHZ.

A single core 3.4 would be listed as 3.4GHZ

A dual core 3.4 would be listed as 3.4 GHZ dual core

A quad core 3.4 would be listed as 3.4 GHZ quad core, etc