Re: dual processors and linux
- From: Michael Heiming <michael+USENET@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 07:21:32 +0200
In comp.os.linux.misc Tyler McHenry <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
I hereby accuse Michael Heiming of stating:
In comp.os.linux.misc Ram <ram0na@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
Roy L. Fuchs wrote:
First off, the way they are sold today, a doubling in size of their
given number does NOT mean that the CPU is running twice as fast.
What do you mean by this? Doubling the size of what given number?
The labeling of CPU is sometimes confusing, there is a AMD 2400
in this box but its frequency is just close to 2000 MHz according
to /proc/cpuinfo. Perhaps this was meant?
This is indeed intentional. Back around the time when AMD introduced their
XP line of processors, the AMD and Intel processor design philosophies were
going in two completely different directions. The best way to explain it in
layman's terms is this:
The "hertz" number, or "clock rate" of a processor tells you how
many "cycles" it goes through every second. How much "work" is done in a
given "cycle", however, is variable. Intel chose to produce processors with
very short cycles that did little bits of work, whereas AMD chose to
produce processors with longer cycles that did more work.
True, "Hz == Hertz" is a SI unit named after the German
scientist Heinrich Rudolf Hertz means 1/second (second^-1). IMHO
AMD CPU usually outperform their Intel counterparts easily at
least under Linux. That's why I use them. ;-)
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo zvpunry@xxxxxxxxxx | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 289: Interference between the keyboard and
- Prev by Date: Re: Filesystem of choices
- Next by Date: Re: Filesystem of choices
- Previous by thread: Re: Linux has poor multimedia features
- Next by thread: Re: dual processors and linux