F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop 0.8ghz or 8ghz? It depends on your needs and the device specifications.

0.8ghz or 8ghz? It depends on your needs and the device specifications.

0.8ghz or 8ghz? It depends on your needs and the device specifications.

Pages (3): Previous 1 2 3 Next
T
thibdu87
Member
229
08-04-2023, 10:30 PM
#11
I interpreted the query as comparing a single 8GHz core to an 80-core processor at 0.8GHz. I realized your calculation aligns with that scenario, resulting in both yielding 8GHz performance.
T
thibdu87
08-04-2023, 10:30 PM #11

I interpreted the query as comparing a single 8GHz core to an 80-core processor at 0.8GHz. I realized your calculation aligns with that scenario, resulting in both yielding 8GHz performance.

A
acekiller990
Member
70
08-25-2023, 02:25 PM
#12
I was interested in that too.
A
acekiller990
08-25-2023, 02:25 PM #12

I was interested in that too.

F
FelipeMelo2010
Junior Member
7
08-25-2023, 11:02 PM
#13
The frequency isn't split among the number of cores. A 0.8 GHz figure applies to all cores equally. The Ryzen 5600X has six cores with twelve threads, and each core runs at 3.7 GHz—not a fraction per core. @Vishera's explanation is accurate.
F
FelipeMelo2010
08-25-2023, 11:02 PM #13

The frequency isn't split among the number of cores. A 0.8 GHz figure applies to all cores equally. The Ryzen 5600X has six cores with twelve threads, and each core runs at 3.7 GHz—not a fraction per core. @Vishera's explanation is accurate.

J
jaggereo
Member
53
08-27-2023, 01:46 AM
#14
Sony and IBM attempted a similar project with the PS3. These were early leaders in technology!
J
jaggereo
08-27-2023, 01:46 AM #14

Sony and IBM attempted a similar project with the PS3. These were early leaders in technology!

L
livtheviking
Posting Freak
846
08-27-2023, 02:37 AM
#15
But... multi-threading allows tasks to run concurrently... I used to believe it would speed things up, though writing code would be more complex (though not impossible). It could actually be quicker since it handles multiple operations at once, but on a single core you might run into problems with background processes.
L
livtheviking
08-27-2023, 02:37 AM #15

But... multi-threading allows tasks to run concurrently... I used to believe it would speed things up, though writing code would be more complex (though not impossible). It could actually be quicker since it handles multiple operations at once, but on a single core you might run into problems with background processes.

M
MineaBeef
Junior Member
34
08-31-2023, 03:24 AM
#16
The system featured 8 SPEs and 1 PPE. This CPU was built to handle both graphics and CPU tasks simultaneously, allowing the PS3’s GPU to support graphics alongside CPU operations. Gone are the days when you had to manually code programs for specific core counts; now systems adapt dynamically to available cores. Blender serves as a solid example of this flexibility.
M
MineaBeef
08-31-2023, 03:24 AM #16

The system featured 8 SPEs and 1 PPE. This CPU was built to handle both graphics and CPU tasks simultaneously, allowing the PS3’s GPU to support graphics alongside CPU operations. Gone are the days when you had to manually code programs for specific core counts; now systems adapt dynamically to available cores. Blender serves as a solid example of this flexibility.

H
husker53
Posting Freak
802
08-31-2023, 05:07 AM
#17
I used a limited number of active cores and a restricted frequency setting in Windows. I confirmed the exact frequencies and core counts with HWinfo. First, I restarted the computer and stopped all background applications like Afterburner, ICUE, AISuite, Malwarebytes, etc. Then I launched Cinebench R23 and prioritized it in Task Manager. I ran it for 10 minutes under both scenarios and noted the final results. System specifications are available in my BabyBlu profile. All other parameters remained unchanged except core count and clock speed. Outcomes: 8 cores at 2.6GHz scored 7167, while 4 cores at 5.2GHz scored 7090. Summary: Even with similar total cycles per second, the lower-thread configuration outperformed by about 1.09%.
H
husker53
08-31-2023, 05:07 AM #17

I used a limited number of active cores and a restricted frequency setting in Windows. I confirmed the exact frequencies and core counts with HWinfo. First, I restarted the computer and stopped all background applications like Afterburner, ICUE, AISuite, Malwarebytes, etc. Then I launched Cinebench R23 and prioritized it in Task Manager. I ran it for 10 minutes under both scenarios and noted the final results. System specifications are available in my BabyBlu profile. All other parameters remained unchanged except core count and clock speed. Outcomes: 8 cores at 2.6GHz scored 7167, while 4 cores at 5.2GHz scored 7090. Summary: Even with similar total cycles per second, the lower-thread configuration outperformed by about 1.09%.

M
Morgan_98
Member
103
09-06-2023, 04:21 AM
#18
I've reviewed this discussion multiple times. A single core running at 0.01ghz adds up to just 0.8ghz across 80 cores, which equals about 800MHz per core. That's like having 80 calculators on one chip—performance would be severely limited, especially for multitasking.
M
Morgan_98
09-06-2023, 04:21 AM #18

I've reviewed this discussion multiple times. A single core running at 0.01ghz adds up to just 0.8ghz across 80 cores, which equals about 800MHz per core. That's like having 80 calculators on one chip—performance would be severely limited, especially for multitasking.

A
aqilthebro
Member
157
09-07-2023, 11:39 PM
#19
This setup is quite unique. Assuming the same instruction performance, the 8GHz chip is about ten times stronger than the 80-core 10MHz processor.
A
aqilthebro
09-07-2023, 11:39 PM #19

This setup is quite unique. Assuming the same instruction performance, the 8GHz chip is about ten times stronger than the 80-core 10MHz processor.

E
Emma31178
Member
193
09-09-2023, 01:31 PM
#20
It would likely require around 800 minutes to notice any sign of desktop lol. lmao. That’s wild. I assumed a 4-hour WPrime 1024m job would take a while on a PIII Coppermine 256 at 450MHz.
E
Emma31178
09-09-2023, 01:31 PM #20

It would likely require around 800 minutes to notice any sign of desktop lol. lmao. That’s wild. I assumed a 4-hour WPrime 1024m job would take a while on a PIII Coppermine 256 at 450MHz.

Pages (3): Previous 1 2 3 Next