CPU advancement: your priority.

[alg7_munif]

It has been a while since we got faster CPUs and the software side has also catched up to the multi threaded nature of current CPUs.

Now that things are quite settled down with some of the programs are being accelerated by the GPU as well, which kind of CPU advancement would you consider to be your priority, regardless whether you are gaming, folding or doing something else on your computer?

 

[GotNoRice]

I'd honestly focus on overall performance. Clock speed and IPC are going to work together to determine how fast the chip can actually perform tasks. Whatever combination results in the best performance is fine with me. Nothing wrong with more threads as long as that doesn't come as a sacrifice to single-threaded performance. Power efficiency would be important mainly in the context of the fact that efficient processors tend to have more overclocking headroom.

 

[RoffleCopter]

I like voting on polls.

Higher IPC + OC = sexy time

 

[Aus10]

What is higher IPC? Sorry still learning lol

 

[cyclone3d]

What is higher IPC? Sorry still learning lol

Instructions Per Clock

That being said.. higher IPC is always nice as long as they don't lower the clocks.

More threads (real cores) are always a plus as well.

 

[serpretetsky]

i basically want a 486 processor running at 500ghz

edit: i wonder how fast a 486 would be at todays standard speeds: around 3ghz.

 

[Activate: AMD]

higher clockspeed.. because thats what counts... right???

this is a silly poll, IPC, clock speed, threads and power consumption are just variables to achieve the end results... the right balance depends on your target. the only debate should be overall performance vs performance per watt

 

[alg7_munif]

Higher IPC would need a new CPU architecture and performance for single threaded application could also be improved especially with overclocking involved.

With a smaller process we could get a higher clock speed or a lower power consumption. You could also get a higher clock speed with overclocking while sacrificing power efficiency.

More threads would mean better multi tasking and higher performance for multi threaded applications.

Better power efficiency would mean that you could get more performace for less power usage, regardless what is your target for the best compromise between performance and power consumption.

For my daily usage, I think that I don't need a higher IPC or a higher clock speed since current CPUs are fast enough for most tasks. I still need more speed for some special task like video editing so I think that more threads are important to me.

I would like to have CPU power saving mode like clock throttling on individual core to improve the power efficiency. I don't want a power efficient CPU like Atom but I want the CPU to be efficient in the way that it will use low power mode when the performance is not needed but it can push out more performance while sacrificing power consumption when needed.

 

[rive22]

All the above

 

[GushpinBob]

i basically want a 486 processor running at 500ghz

edit: i wonder how fast a 486 would be at todays standard speeds: around 3ghz.

It would probably still run like a dog.

Look at it this way: an i7 920 with default speeds runs circles around a Pentium 4 with the same clock rate, even with all but one core disabled.

 

[cyclone3d]

It would probably still run like a dog.

Look at it this way: an i7 920 with default speeds runs circles around a Pentium 4 with the same clock rate, even with all but one core disabled.

That is mostly becuase the P4 was a horrible design. A PIII running at the same clock speed as a P4 would run circles around the P4 as well.

 

[05251975]

higher clock speed.

when the clock speed is increased, all software, old and new, runs faster!

you don't need to reinvent, rebuild, redo, the software.

 

[drescherjm]

P4 was a perfect example of why higher clock speed is not always better. Clockspeed and IPC are both important.