Q&A: Clock speed vs. core count

<span id="hs_cos_wrapper_name" class="hs_cos_wrapper hs_cos_wrapper_meta_field hs_cos_wrapper_type_text" style="" data-hs-cos-general-type="meta_field" data-hs-cos-type="text" >Q&A: Clock speed vs. core count</span>

Mar 26

Mar 26

Components

shutterstock_585388175.jpgAssuming consumers and enterprises want maximum speed and efficiency out of their computers, what’s more important—CPU clock speed or more cores? While we’re on the topic, why aren’t processing speeds increasing? 

We interviewed Samuel Alt, technical support specialist at Ingram Micro, to settle the clock speed vs. core count debate. He spends his days supporting SMB customers who have tech questions just like this. Here’s Samuel’s thoughts based on real-world IT experience.

Can you give us the recent history of processing speeds?

It really wasn’t that long ago when every processor on the market was single core. And the originals were running on hertz. Not megahertz or gigahertz—just hertz. We’re talking extremely slow systems compared to today. So it made sense why CPU clock speed was king back then, because multi-core processors didn’t hit the mainstream market until around 2005.

So is clock speed no longer king?

Clock speed now shares the glory with multi-core processors. It’s a good thing because there are technological limitations when it comes to increasing speed on single-core processors. When dual-core processors entered the market, everyone was raving about how fast they were. Today, we see quad-cores, octa-cores and beyond. This is why I don’t see a need for, say, a 10 GHz processor.

Why aren’t processing speeds increasing like we thought they would?

Multiple tasks are being completed faster than ever, even though clock speeds have remained the same. The primary reason is because programs are taking advantage of the multiple cores.

Here’s a simplified illustration: At a large construction site, you never see just one fast worker on the job. Even if he or she is the quickest worker available, it’s proven that multiple workers are still required to finish large jobs on time. In the computing world, increasing clock speed is rarely more efficient than increasing core count. There’s strength in numbers and multitasking.  

What else is worth mentioning in the speed conversation?

We’re seeing more “stuff” crammed into CPUs than before, which may be another reason processing speeds haven’t increased much. Thanks to ever-shrinking components, we’re asking computers to do more than what they were originally designed for. Examples include advanced, built-in networking cards, RAID functionality and microcontrollers. Additional circuitry on the CPU now goes beyond just compute.

Do you have education customers? Here are 3 ways IoT can make schools safer.

Topics: SMB, components

ssd vs hdd comparison
crucial white paper
New call-to-action

Trending Components Articles

ssd vs hdd comparison
Technology Categories