Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Quad core 2.5GHz = 10GHz processor?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 26, 2009 2:00:37 PM

Hi,

Stupid question, I know. But some guy on the internet simply will not accept that cores don't multiply together, and that a quad core at 2.5GHz doesn't make a processor equal to 10GHz. He's given me links to ads on eBay of people advertising them as 10GHz processors and deems that as "proof" of his claim.

Maybe one of you can explain better than I can the difference between clock speed and cores so this guy walks away a little less ignorant.
July 26, 2009 3:37:31 PM

If you have one huge trench to dig, and some city construction workers to do it, each running at 2.5GHz, you can easily have 4 construction workers dig at once, for a combined total of 10GHz of digging!

If, however, you have a broken pipe down a manhole to fix, one 2.5GHz city construction worker will hop down in there and get to work, while the other 3 will do what they do best, stand around and watch. Obviously this task would be finished quicker if the one guy working were running at 10GHz, but he's not, so 3/4 of our tax dollars are wasted!

(The guy you are arguing with is probably a 'stander'. Best to just move on and let him wallow in his ignorance.)
a b à CPUs
July 26, 2009 3:51:54 PM

Agree with the last line ^.
Move on and forget about this. This guy is too far behind the curve, it will take months or even years of education for him to overcome his ignorance. It simply cannot be overcome in a few threads on a forum.
Related resources
July 26, 2009 4:12:24 PM

jitpublisher said:
Agree with the last line ^.
Move on and forget about this. This guy is too far behind the curve, it will take months or even years of education for him to overcome his ignorance. It simply cannot be overcome in a few threads on a forum.


That type of stupidity cannot be fixed, it is a disability he will live with all his life... poor guy...
July 26, 2009 4:17:48 PM

If you take away half a hole, how much do you have left?
July 26, 2009 4:26:31 PM

OK, OK, real answer this time, in case hes a relative. heheh
If a 8 cylinder motor runs a 2500 rpm and a 4 cylinder does as well, the 8 cylinder isnt 2 engines
PS relative, hopefully as in In-Law
a b à CPUs
July 26, 2009 4:33:07 PM

LOL, I love those ebay ads. Wait til the suckers that fall for it do charge backs when they find they have been mislead. "False Advertisement" Paypal will do an immediate reversal of funds if asked.

I sell on Ebay, and have to compete with those idiots.
a b à CPUs
July 27, 2009 2:06:48 PM

Well...

Ghz refers to the speed a core is running at...

Sorta like sound...

Having sounds with the pitches 120hz and 550hz don't make them combine to whatever they add up to... (otherwise our eyes would be dead by now.
a b à CPUs
July 27, 2009 2:22:31 PM

sure its not just a troll /ebay scammer lol?
a b à CPUs
July 27, 2009 2:25:52 PM

Damn those guys on the Internet.
a b à CPUs
July 30, 2009 1:17:16 PM

I don't think our government law covers auctions for misleading advertising, oh well...
a b à CPUs
July 30, 2009 5:14:52 PM

Sounds like another job for my cake analogy...

Having a quad-core CPU is like having four ovens in your kitchen. If it takes, say, 30 minutes to bake a cake in one oven, four ovens doesn't let you bake a cake any faster. But you can bake four cakes at once, so you're up to 8 cakes/hour instead of just the 2 cakes/hour you can get with one oven.

Some "applications" such as making a dinner can take good advantage of 4 ovens - you can roast the turkey in one oven while you cook the veggies in another oven and bake the cake in a third oven, etc... But it still takes 30 minutes to bake a cake.

So, while under the right circumstances a quad-core 2.5GHz processor may be able to do as much work as a single-core 10GHz processor, in reality they are quite different beasts and it's very misleading to make that claim. It would be kind of like saying your oven can bake 4 cakes at once just because it can go up to 1600 degrees...
a b à CPUs
July 30, 2009 5:45:28 PM

ahhh cakes.............................................................................


*drools and falls off chair*
a b à CPUs
July 31, 2009 9:44:53 AM

Caaake?
a b à CPUs
August 1, 2009 1:05:31 AM

i think the cake analogy is the best way ive heard it xplained so far, i was working on something about planes and engines, but that is much easier to understand.
a b à CPUs
August 1, 2009 2:54:31 AM

The cake is a lie.
a b à CPUs
August 1, 2009 3:13:51 AM

Cake.

There once was a guy who liked cake,
All he would do was bake and bake,
But he never expected me to take and take,
So he lost his last and final cake,
And that's why you find him at the bottom of the lake lake,
August 1, 2009 4:38:17 AM

Tho your word rhyme in time, and are all about cake for our sake, Im on a diet, so please be quiet, all this talk about cake heheh
a b à CPUs
August 1, 2009 5:51:51 AM

hehe
a b à CPUs
August 1, 2009 6:06:54 AM

This is like the best way to up post count!
August 1, 2009 6:20:55 AM

Its as easy as pie cake
August 1, 2009 7:13:55 AM

Hmmmmmmmm yummmmmmmmmmmmmmm Ill take a bite of points too. MmMMMMM strawberry shortcake!
a b à CPUs
August 2, 2009 3:05:07 AM

hehe
January 15, 2010 9:55:12 AM

you know this is a really funny thread because wow there are soo many people even "TECH CERTIFIED PPL" would tell me that man my quad core is runny at 12ghz because each core is runny 3ghz so yea you gotta combine them. I said i dont think thats how it works sir, so he replied, "trust me, im a pro, i do this for a living helping people like you understand computers" i was like wow in my mind, so i just told him hmm i guess u are right, then he just simply said "well i hope u learned something useful today" seriously there are way too many ignorant people out there that would talk so much about something they dont know about and are so damn sure they are right no matter if its wrong. oh well just move on, i came across this article because as i was playing call of duty 4 on my pc this guy just popped up telling everybody his computer specs are better than everyone.
January 15, 2010 11:39:53 AM

The person you are dealing with is suffering AICKDS (Aquired Immune Computer Knowledge Deficiency Syndrome)....this conditiom is at the moment not curable and many at times people can go for years and years without any outwards symptoms or knowledge of the disease, many GPU and CPU lives have been lost as a result of this incurable disease....it's unfortunate really
January 15, 2010 12:35:59 PM

^^^^ Hahaha
January 15, 2010 12:41:20 PM

wait....

you mean... I have a 12ghz cpu!?!?!

seriously though, I see this all the time on ebay especially. I think people buy into it too because they don't know any better. ( need.... more... mega hurtz!!! )

This is as bad as the people who sell "Lightning Fast Dell..... pentium 4 systems" that sell like hot cakes @ well above market value because people see the Lightning Fast, and think they're getting something special.
January 15, 2010 7:47:54 PM

itadakimasu said:

This is as bad as the people who sell "Lightning Fast Dell..... pentium 4 systems" that sell like hot cakes @ well above market value because people see the Lightning Fast, and think they're getting something special.

At Costco (maybe elsewhere) the trial software on the HP computers boasts "More gigahertz = faster computer". That pisses me off.
January 17, 2010 12:40:16 AM

That cake idea is a good 1.

I have a similar version.

4 lane freeway. You max speed is 100Kph on 4 lanes. The AMOUNT of traffic on the four lanes at any 1 time can ONLY travel at 100Kph. If you made it a 1 lane freeway, you still only TRAVEL at 100Kph. IT doesn't mean that you went from 4 to 1 the speed limit is now 400kph. (Although that would be nice).
January 18, 2010 6:14:25 PM

Or as someone else put it: If a car can travel at 100mph and has 4 wheels, the car must be capable of travelling at 400mph!

It makes perfect sense. I can see no flaws whatsoever in the statement! :D 
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 30, 2010 5:33:54 PM

Well, you are all wrong. The problem is the access to memory. One CPU can access memory at maximum memory speed. Two or more have to share memory, which causes interference and thus loss in throughput. We are getting into queuing theory here. Mainframe manufacturers went through this problem about 40 years ago, and Tandem computers solved (almost perfectly) the problem with a new technology called messaging. Individual CPUs had their dedicated memory, and the sharing of information was done via fast messaging between CPUs. Tandem systems were the only ones in the industry that scale, meaning that for each added CPU you got almost 100% additional throughput. This is an expensive solution, and no PC operating system I know can use it, therefore we are again dealing with a 40 year old problem. Ask HP which acquired Tandem via Compaq if they would release the NonStop operating system for PC use, then find someone to port all PC software to NonStop... it is probably not going to happen.
So live with the fact that the number of CPUs for PCs will stay low. When you get to 8 cores, the 8th core adds only about 10% more CPU power.
Now to a more relevant example for the problem: Lines at the grocery store. The cashier is the memory, the shopper is the CPU. 4 people in line (4 CPUs). When one shopper is served, all others have to wait, since there is only one line (memory). The other shoppers have to wait and, being CPUs, are useless while the memory serves one CPU. In a computer it works because the CPU is way faster than memory and accesses memory only to fetch a small amount (into the cache) and while that CPU is processing the information in the cache, another CPU can access the memory. Get the picture? Memory is a huge bottleneck, and all CPUs could hum away if they only had their own dedicated memory (cashier). So lets open three more registers and all shoppers will be out in a flash...:) 
a b à CPUs
January 30, 2010 6:44:21 PM



No, not really true at all :pfff: 
If this where true you would see massive increases in performance when running faster RAM (which you do not).
February 1, 2010 4:43:41 AM

dead thread walking..... :pfff: 

however we cant blame average joe for their stupidity about not knowing computer. to most of average joe/jane a computer is merely just mouse and monitor....(many of them amount us still dont know how to type/use keyboard...not to mention open computer case to see what it is..)
February 1, 2010 4:59:40 AM

One of my friends purchased a laptop because it had a sticker which said "Can play Gears of War 2" on it... I face-palmed...

And then I ask the specs and it turned out to be a several year old machine which weighed a ton and used old parts... I face-palmed again...

The average consumer pretty much has to have their computer purchasing decisions done for them by someone who actually knows computers, be it an honest salesman, a friend, or someone on forums such as these.
a c 126 à CPUs
February 1, 2010 5:03:53 AM

outlw6669 said:
http://jamie-online.com/random-jamz/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/facepalm.jpg

No, not really true at all :pfff: 
If this where true you would see massive increases in performance when running faster RAM (which you do not).


I would say if the program could actually utilize each core to its potential and the RAM as well then it would be like that.

But since most programs are pretty poorly coded, even with multicore support they tend to be pretty bad in performance increases.
February 1, 2010 5:21:55 AM

jrocks84 said:
One of my friends purchased a laptop because it had a sticker which said "Can play Gears of War 2" on it... I face-palmed...

And then I ask the specs and it turned out to be a several year old machine which weighed a ton and used old parts... I face-palmed again...

The average consumer pretty much has to have their computer purchasing decisions done for them by someone who actually knows computers, be it an honest salesman, a friend, or someone on forums such as these.


but without these idiot contributing their stupidity i think many of company may go bankrupt as the gross revenue would be a lot lower. i think it would be turn into worst nightmare for these oem to survive if many people suddunly become smart like us....

btw how old is it in the laptop!? if it says that can run gears of war it may be actually run it!!(barely......2~4fps....)
February 2, 2010 12:56:13 AM

Well since Gears of War 2 came out a bit over a year ago, I'm pretty sure they stuck that sticker on after the laptop had been sitting on the shelf for a bit more than a year. It also only had integrated graphics, so I bet it could barely run it.
February 2, 2010 4:39:37 AM

jrocks84 said:
Well since Gears of War 2 came out a bit over a year ago, I'm pretty sure they stuck that sticker on after the laptop had been sitting on the shelf for a bit more than a year. It also only had integrated graphics, so I bet it could barely run it.



if it said to be laid in the shelf for over a year then chance are high the igp may be either gma 3100/x3100, geforce 6050/7050 or deltachrome 9. so which it can capable to run gears of war 2 but it wont be playable that's for sure.

that also happan on some graphic card that paste a tick says to be able to run crysis(dont ask how) but when you look at the specification you'll realize they are only "capable" to run it, doesn't mean it will be playable....it's commonly seem on hd 3200/4200 and geforce 8400/9400 with 32/64bit buswidth....
a b à CPUs
February 2, 2010 4:56:16 AM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
!