The story about cpu cores
The story about cpu cores
darn now if only that was what i typed huh yeah sounds super simple can't wait for somebody to make a program for that
review the benchmark for your multitasking task 6 compared to another half dozen; AMD seems to be the stronger choice right now for most purposes, though Intel isn't a bad option. What I mentioned shouldn't have swayed your decision either. It did, in a way.
These devices serve as my support spots though I didn’t verify the wattage right away when I first tested the N100. Now that it’s my router, I can’t confirm the power usage. It caused my 12V 3A PoE adapter to shut down during use, hinting at a boost capacity above 36W (or possibly a bad PoE splitter, unlike the N5105 which handled it fine). The Steam Deck passed the test without issue, reaching up to 15W single-thread and 20-25W multi-thread from the wall. I’d estimate the Steam Deck is at least 33% more efficient, considering its OLED display and slight under-voltage. It runs about 5-6W when idle on my desktop, and during boot with the PoE adapter it was around 11W—though that’s not a perfect match since pfSense isn’t built for deep idle. Overall, Zen 2 is clearly more power-efficient than what Intel offers today, especially with Zen 3 now available. Right now, Intel desktops need to generate huge amounts of power just to keep up with the 7800X3D, and even then it often falls short in many games. I was also a bit let down when swapping my 8600k for a 12400 consumed used roughly the same power at idle, suggesting I might have wanted an E-core model instead.
I advise caution here. Maximum wattage doesn't always reflect real power use, especially when efficiency matters. For gaming or video playback, 100% is accurate since you're using full wattage continuously. However, for tasks like video encoding, duration plays a bigger role. A 300W draw over 30 seconds is better than 40W over 6 minutes. But if the 40W system finishes in just a few minutes, it becomes more efficient. I also point out that this discussion compares E cores versus P cores, and I won't claim Intel is always better. While you can set things up to favor one over the other, it's not the main focus here. I want to highlight the 8 P core Intel options at the bottom of the chart. Each time you add more E cores, task completion time drops. If someone could compare a single SMT P core with four E cores, that would clarify things, but I’m not aware of anyone doing such a test. The presence of eight P cores, all running inefficiently at their lowest speeds, makes direct comparisons confusing. Your N100 might stand out when paired with a BIOS set to single-core i3 for a fair test.
I definitely wasn't claiming the split cores don’t function—it’s obvious they do. But when you look at the comparison with AMD, as shown in your chart, it’s quite a stark contrast. There’s no room for testing on the N100; it’s actually my router. I usually give a pass to Geekbench scores on any machine I own just to compare, but it always seems to line up with me losing the power meter.
It seems you overlooked the details above. Using 300W for 30 seconds is more effective than 100W for 2 minutes for that one. (150 watt minutes versus 200 watt minutes) Operating a processor beyond its optimal efficiency range also indicates you're running out of your ideal performance zone.
I request you to review the discussions you share and avoid sharing incorrect information here or elsewhere. This topic isn't even a full page; all necessary context exists in this thread that already challenges or undermines what was said about the 9600k. The misunderstandings aren't about the total power consumption of components under load, but rather how you interpret them. Yes, Intel could have developed a 12 P-core/24 thread chip instead of the i9's 8P/16E 32threaded version, but it would likely lag in n-threaded scenarios. And completing tasks would become much more demanding with only slight adjustments to gaming performance. To boost efficiency, don't push components beyond their optimal range—maintain sufficient voltage, as power depends heavily on the square of voltage.