Phone Scoop

printed August 21, 2014
See this page online at:
http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/discuss.php?fm=m&ff=11785&fi=3224741

Home  ›  News  ›

Samsung Intros 8-Core Exynos 5 Octa Processor

Article Comments  

Back to message list

Top message:  Got cores? by Eee_err Eee_err   Jan 9, 2013, 1:17 PM

Replying to:  Re: Got cores? by T Bone   Jan 9, 2013, 5:59 PM

Re: Got cores?

by Zpike    Jan 10, 2013, 2:37 PM

Well, yes and no. I agree with the premise of what you're saying, but I think you're a little over board, when you say things like, "its often the cast that a computer with fewer megahertz is actually faster than one with more megahertz". Yes, there is much more to a processor than a clock, but the clock is the speed at which it does what it does. So, with any two processors on the same architecture, the one with the higher clock should be fine.

The problem you are referring to is that the clock speeds of inferior technologies were often touted over superior architectures. This was the marketing strategy that propelled Intel to dominance, although AMD consistently out performed them and significantly undercut them on price during the period you were talking about. Nonetheless, the two architectures of the time were as similar as they could be, and it was the one time in processor history that you could know the most about a processor by its clock speed.

Once AMD introduced 64-bit processors and Intel brought out the Pentium IV, the naming conventions and speed specifications became too contorted to follow, and this debacle is what I think you are mostly referring to. However, this didn't really take place until the very end of the 90's and on through the first part of the 21st century.

Nonetheless, clock speeds are still meaningful given that you're comparing processors in the same architecture. A 2.5 GHz Core i7, processor is certainly faster than a 2.0 GHz Core i7 processor. But the fastest AMD processor still isn't faster than a 2.0 GHz Core i7, though I haven't checked the benchmarks recently and AMD could have something I don't know about. And more appropriately, a 2.0 GHz ARM processor doesn't even come close to having the capability of a desktop processor. But I don't see anyone comparing phones to PC's... do you?

Report to moderator

Replies

No replies to this message


This forum is closed.

Back to message list

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Twitter Phone Scoop on Facebook Phone Scoop on Google+ Subscribe to Phone Scoop on YouTube Follow on Instagram

 

All content Copyright 2001-2014 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.
1