You take the time to Benchmark shedloads of CPU's with all manner of different benchmarking software. You also set some artifical rubric that you believe that single core benching on a multicore cpu is somehow revealing? Look if you are going to take time to do something then do it right. Why not provide the multicore bench data as well? Why are you hiding important relevant data?

There is software that I run on my multicore PC that I run as a single application using all cores.

So again, if you are going to take the time to bench cpu's then provide ALL of the data not just the data that you think is important and stop hiding data that you think we as consumers do not need to know.

7 answers Last reply
More about benchmarking
  1. Who is this directed at?
  2. Not really sure what you're exactly referring to, but I'd say one of the main reasons why companies leave out benchmarks for all cores is because:

    1) Most (99%) consumers have no idea what the crap a multi-core processor is and wouldn't even know what they're looking at if they were given the figures, thus making it an unwise decision from a marketing perspective because it would only further confuse customers and detour them from purchases.

    2) A lot of applications still run off a single core and don't utilize multiple cores, so when trying to sell a product while using the customers favorite/most used programs as an example, it wouldn't be smart to talk about performance results that refer to 5-10% of computer usage.


    3) People who want the more detailed, technical information (such as yourself) can already access it on their own, seeing as they're also technologically savvy, so why waste the marketing time, space and money?

    It seems to me that you already have access to the information you're complaining about not being out there, so what's the problem?

    Edit: grammatical corrections
  3. If TH is going to take the time running bench's on a multi core chip and only post the single core data then the data is incomplete.

    My question remains.

    Why does TH BOTHER to run the veritable plethora of benchmarks and only publish the part of the data?

    I would like to know how the mulitcore silicon compares not only in single core use but as it was intended, running multiple threads?

    It seems to me that if I had access to the data I wouldn't need to ask the question.

    In actual fact I and many other people I know use multi-threaded applications EXCLUSIVELY.

    And I love this one:
    "People who want the more detailed, technical information (such as yourself) can already access it on their own, seeing as they're also technologically savvy, so why waste the marketing time, space and money? "

    It doesn't really matter how much time TH spends on their website, or how much marketing time, space and money. What matters is how much time I spend on TH reading their efforts.

    TH exists to attract eyeballs so it gets paid buy it's advertisers.
  4. This topic has been moved from the section CPU & Components to section Site Feedback by Mousemonkey
  5. Umm, the tests they do often are multithreading, that's why people are confused by your question. Show one of their reviews where they don't do tests or benchmarks that are multithreaded.

    Just to give a hint, most modern games are multithreading, encoding is too, etc.
  6. Ahh. Will forward along the suggestion to our editorial team.
    Thanks for the feedback!
  7. Well, if you take into perspective, k you have benchmarking to say from a single core on a single core in mutli-core, yes?

    So, of this if s ingle-core in a multi-core cant run an app as a single-core for a single-core, whats the point of multi-core?

    Then even of this, would be the difference in what is considered to be test software on the idea of cores.

    As a consumer, to say or even vendor, if you are going to get something to sell or buy, what would that probably be?

    Cause of the interest is of "hyper-Threading' i think at times more then multi-threading. For whatever reasons of course.

    For on ideas of "cpu" proccessing to say, if bigger is going to be more the interest then it is almost an irrelevent issue for some ideas of interest to where alot of "concenr" of interest has had its place for ideas of "cpus" but not in its complete though.

    As for the ads comments are of as variant of the issue probably as well, if seen to be due to the fact. or So could facts, yes?

    So of interest is very placent to say of whats what for many things. Is probably why from time to time, cause somehow things just seem not to be there for when they should, yes?
Ask a new question

Read More

Website Opinions Benchmark CPUs Software Tom's Hardware