How to increase all processor cores. What is a central processor? If you use 4 processor cores

The number of cores of the laptop processor pours into the drink. A lot of buyers attach great importance to these characteristics, following the principle “the more cores, the more productive the laptop”. But the formula is far from being true.

As the experts of the Foxtrot online store, the hard core processor reveals the full potential only when working with important 3D games and resource-saving engineering / design programs. In other types of koristuvach do not see the increase in the number of speeds, but the processor is less effective in pivsili.

Productivity of 4-core processors

The most productive is a laptop for igor, equipped with a processor with 4 cores. In addition, among 4-core processors, there is its own competition: some CPU models can cope with their tasks better than others.

The difference in productivity is explained not only by the number of cores, but by other characteristics of the processor - the clock frequency, technical process, number of threads, the amount of cache memory and the frequency of the system bus.

At the same time, the difference between processors with the same number of cores is demonstrated with the help of special tests (benchmarks), the results of which are like balls. The maximum number of points is scored by Intel Core i7 and Core i5 processors. Processors of the AMD family have twice the balls.

The advantage of Intel products is often explained by using the company's Hyper-Threading technology, which allows you to mentally divide the skin's physical core into two virtual ones. As a result, a 4-core laptop, which may have a processor with a 4/8 architecture, processes 8 data streams in parallel, which positively affects its speed.

Porada: when choosing a gaming laptop, give priority to models with Core i7 or i5 processors that support Hyper-Threading technology.

If 4 cores are not needed

The number of processor cores adds to the versatility of the laptop. Why overpay for the great potential of the CPU, so the effort is not needed?

The 4-core processor is fully functional, as well as:

• koristuvach pratsyuє z simple programs and games, yakі not "imprisoned" for parallel calculation;

• laptop vikoristovuєtsya for vykonannya incoherent tasks - work with office programs, surfing the Internet, splkuvannya in social networks.

A laptop with a 2-core Intel or AMD processor may have a number of advantages over an older laptop:

• greater autonomy with the help of modest energy supply;

• lower variability of the laptop;

• robot with 4 threads (Intel Core models with Hyper-Threading technology).

Before speech, the productivity of a laptop is no less than a processor. A significant role is played by the video card and operational memory (not less than 4 GB).

In the leaf fall number, we reportedly looked at the features of the new choti-core processor Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700, being in the middle of the head rank of its architectural features. In addition, it was presented the first results of a peer-to-peer test of this processor. Let's guess, there were only a few tests performed by Intel's technical experts at the IDF 2006 Forum. However, a number of tests, which were victorious, having called some doubts in their objectivity, we decided to independently conduct a report, a general test of the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor in parallel with the Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600 processor.

Peredmova

Let's guess, at the IDF 2006 forum, Intel presented the new Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 dual-core processor, and it followed the first results of the test on a par with the Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600 dual-core processor. For testing by Intel specialists, the following benchmarks and add-ons were selected:

• 3DMark06v. 1.0.2;
• PCMark05v. 1.1.0;
• 3DS Max 8SP2;
• XMPEG 5.03 (DivX 6.2.5 codec);
• POV Ray 3.7 Beta 15;
• Sony Vegas 7.0 Build 115.

Obviously, such a set of tests cannot be considered objective for evaluating the productivity of such a pair of processors. Deisno, 3DMark06 v. 1.0.2 - this is a synthetic game test, which is tested for testing processors and video cards. Unfortunately, on the basis of these results, it is not possible to make a report about the productivity of the processor in games. І the fact that the PC demonstrates a high result in the 3DMark06 v. 1.0.2 does not mean that in real PC games the results will be the same.

PCMark05 test v. 1.1 allows you to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the productivity of the PC and other subsystems, the CPU. The unparalleled victory of the test is those that are not needed for testing for more than an hour, the test for an objective comprehensive assessment of PC productivity is not enough.

Addendum 3DS Max 8 SP2 can be stopped for testing the processor, Intel's prote fachivtsy won the test for the final rendering of three-world scenes. Age of the robot in 3DS Max 8 SP - not just rendering, but the process of creating a scene. Scripts that imitate the work of a koristuvach at the windows of projections, during the hour of testing, also did not stop. If in this way the main focus lies on the processor of the graphic card, it would be wrong to say that the results should not lie in the processor's view.

The addition of POV-Ray 3.7 Beta 15, which includes a benchmark, again allows the processor to protest against productivity when rendering trivi- mer scenes. The same should be done with the XMPEG 5.03 program, which was paired with the DivX 6.2.5 codec to convert High Definition video content.

Well, the last program - Sony Vegas 7.0a Build 115 - was designed for non-linear video editing. In this situation, everything is correct and I can’t get any respect from everyday life.

Irrespective of what the skin from the reviewed tests (or supplements) is widely expanded and traditionally tested for testing processors, work, whether it be objects, about the performance of the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor, relying less on the results of this set of tests do not call correctly. It may well appear that in these specially selected tests, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 core processor demonstrates its superiority over the Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600 dual-core processor, but it does not mean that you can talk about increased productivity with other programs. So, on the basis of, for example, the results of the test for converting videos with XMPEG 5.03 programs paired with the DivX 6.2.5 codec, we can talk about those that the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor, when working with any programs, allows you to take into account the increase in productivity with an Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600 processor?

For otrimannya bіlsh ob'єktivnogo uyavlennya about produktivnіst CPU cycles Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 that viyavlennya Klas zavdan at virіshennі yakih mozhna govorito about bezperechnu perevagu chotiroh nuclei over EYAD, m- virіshili hold povnotsіnne porіvnyalne testuvannya chotiriyadernogo that dvoyadernogo protsesorіv іz zastosuvannyam dosit great testіv set.

Ale, first of all, proceed to the review of the testing methodology and analysis of the results, we will make a short summary about the participants in the testing.

Briefly about the processors Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 and Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600

The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor is codenamed Kentsfield. From the looks of the design, they are two dual-core Conroe processors, united in one processor package.

The maximum power consumption (TDP) of the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 core processor is set to 130 watts, and it also requires an efficient cooling system, so it is impossible to create a quiet computer based on such a processor. The maximum power consumption (TDP) of the Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600 dual-core processor can be as low as 95W.

The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor can be clocked at 2.66 GHz and running at 1.238 V, FSB set to 1066 MHz, and the total L2 cache is 8 MB (2x4 MB). The Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600 processor can be set to 2.93 GHz and 1.213 V, FSB to 1066 MHz, and L2 cache to 4 MB.

Short technical characteristics of both processors are given in Table. one.

Table 1. Brief technical characteristics of processors
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 and Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600

Testing technique

For testing the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor, the entire configuration stand was tested:

• system board - Intel D975XBX2 (BIOS BX97510J.86A.1304.2006.0620.1451);
• RAM - DDR2-800 Kingston KHX8000D2K2/2G (2x1024 MB in dual-channel mode);
• memory timings:

CAS Latency - 4,

RAS to CAS Delay - 4,

Row Precharge - 3,

Active to Precharge - 12;

• video system – MSI NX8800GTX video card (NVIDIA GeForce 8800GTX graphics processor); video driver version ForceWare 84.21;
• disk subsystem - two Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 disks with a capacity of 120 GB each, combined into a RAID array of level 0 on a Sil 3114 RAID controller; NTFS file structure;
• operating system – Windows XP Professional SP2.

Dodatkovo the drivers of all the built-in outbuildings were installed.

As it was already planned, the dual-core processor Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600 was protesting for the match.

For testing both processors, we set up benchmarks and real programs, which intensively exploit the processor and memory and traditionally win for a comprehensive analysis of system productivity in a nutshell:

• game tests:

Quake 4 Demo version 1.3,

F.E.A.R. ver 1.07,

Far Cry v.1.33,

Prey version 1.01,

Company of Heroes ver 1.0,

Serious Sam 2 Demo,

The Chronics of Riddick;

• PC productivity at a glance:

Crystal Mark 9.0;

• science education:

Science Mark 2.0,

Super_PI/mod 1.5 XS,

SunGard Adaptiv Credit Risk;

• robot with 3D graphics:

3ds Max 8.0 SP3 (Script SPECapc 3ds max 8 v.1.3),

Alias ​​WaveFront Maya 6.5 (Script SPECapc Maya 6.5 v1.0),

SPECViewperf 9.0,

CINEBENCH 9.5,

POV-Ray v.3.7 Beta 17 (introduction test);

• text recognition: ABBYY FineReader 8.0 Pro;
• processing of digital photos: Adobe Photoshop CS2;
• audio coding: Lame 4.0;
• archiving: 7-ZIP 4.42;
• video coding:

XMPEG 5.2 Beta 2,

DivX Converter 6.1.1,

TMPGEnc 2.524,

MainConcept MPEG Encoder 1.51,

MainConcept H.264 Encoder v.2.0.15.

All tests were run three times, and the results of the trials were calculated by the average value and the confidence range of 95% success rate.

Description of test setup

Game tests

The group of gaming tests was made up of the most popular dynamic games of the year and the synthetic benchmark 3DMark06 v.1.0.2, which is used to determine the productivity of a PC in gaming programs and is traditionally used for testing video cards. However, the results of this test lie not only in the video card, but also in the capabilities of the central processor.

In order to maximize the processor itself, and not the video card, when testing all the games and the 3DMark06 v.1.0.2 benchmark, they were launched at a separate resolution of 800x600 pixels, and the video driver was set to maximum productivity. In addition, due to the increased focus on the central processor in games, anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering technologies were not victorious. All the games were adjusted to the maximum productivity for the performance of the game, and in the case of successful effects, which increase the realism of the image, but are also indicated for the decrease in productivity. Describing the onset of a skin gris - to finish it tediously and tediously, so we simply guess the main principle: all effects are turned on, yak it is possible to turn it on.

It is significant that the games Quake 4 ver. 1.3 and Prey ver 1.014 we zastosovuvali demo-versions, written specifically for this testing, and for all others - tі, scho enter the warehouse igor.

In game tests, the speed of frame processing was simulated, i.e. the number of frames per second (frame per second, fps).

In the 3DMark06 v.1.0.2 test, the result, which is awarded for a folding formula, is measured in unlimited units, moreover, the bigger, the better.

PC productivity on fire

Up to a group of tests aimed at simulating the overall productivity of a PC, PCMark05 and CrystalMark 9.0 have risen.

The first test is recognized for a comprehensive analysis of PC productivity. A number of tests (headline 48) are being carried out for him, which emphasizes the need for different PC subsystems: processor, memory, graphical subsystem, data storage subsystem. Based on the test results, an integral indicator of system productivity is awarded, and the productivity index of four PC subsystems (CPU Score, Memory, Graphics, HDD) is displayed.

The results of the PCMark05 test are measured in unlimited units, and the higher the result, the better.

Another test is also complex and purposeful for the analysis of PC productivity in general and other systems. For this benchmark, a lot of tests are carried out with the most important goals for the central processor (ALU, FPU), memory (MEM), data storage subsystem (HDD), graphics subsystem (GDI, D2D, OGL).

Behind the test results, an unlimited integral indicator of productivity (Mark) is calculated, and indicators of productivity of other PC subsystems are added.

Znov-??? - chim vishchy result, tim better.

Science education

At the warehouse of a group of tests that imitate scientific developments, Science Mark 2.0, Super_PI / mod 1.5 XS and SunGard Adaptiv Credit Risk were revealed.

Science Mark 2.0 test for assigning PC productivity to the hour of scientific research. The main focus is on the new processor and memory.

The results of the test are submitted in unsized units. More high result means more high productivity.

For the Super_PI/mod 1.5 XS test, the number of PIs is calculated according to the specified accuracy (number of characters after komi). Our tester was given the highest accuracy - 32 M, which is 32 million signs after Komi.

The result of the test is an hour of roaring, turns in seconds. I realized that less than an hour means more productivity of the processor.

SunGard Adaptiv Credit Risk is a program designed to assess credit risks for a variety of factors based on the analysis of the great aggregate of data. Vaughn is the industry standard and victorious with great corporations. Oriented zastosuvannya in cluster systems and hard servers, tsya program improves the richness of processing and scales well with increasing number of processors.

The result of the test based on the program SunGard Adaptiv Credit Risk is an hour of recovery in seconds. Less than an hour, more productivity of the processor.

Archive

For archiving vicorists, use the rich streaming archiver 7-Zip 4.42. Archived a test catalog with a size of 135 MB, which was compressed to 66.9 MB, and the maximum compression level (Ultra) was set.

The result of the test is an hour of archiving at the same time less than an hour, which, of course, is more beautiful.

Audio coding

For encoding audio files in WAV format in MP3 format, the popular Lame 4.0 codec has been installed. Encoded WAV-file with a final size of 195 MB, which was converted into an MP3-file with a size of 17.7 MB. The codec is launched from the command line with standard tweaks (44.1 kHz, 128 Kb/s).

The result of the test is an hour of converting, the number of turns is in seconds, which is less, more beautiful.

Text recognition

For recognition of the text, ABBYY FineReader 8.0 Pro was used. A 49-sided PDF file has been selected as a document for recognition.

The result of the test is an hour of recognizing a document, expressions in seconds, which is less, but shorter.

3D graphics

Up to a group of tests that show the productivity of the processor when working with 3D add-ons, SPECapc 3ds max8 v.1.3, SPECapc for Maya 6.5, POV-Ray 3.7 Beta 17, CINEBENCH 9.5 and SPECViewperf 9.0.3.

Test SPECapc 3ds max8 v.1.3 with a script for Autodesk 3DS max 8.0 SP3 and assignments for platform testing with priority on the processor and video card. In a new way, the rendering of final 3D-scenes with the most important intention on the central processor, and the typical task of editing that scene with the most important intention on the video card processor, are different. In order to shift the main focus on the processor and minimize the impact of the video card on the final result of the test, for the SPECapc 3ds max8 v.1.3 program. zastosovuvsya software video driver (Software).

Vymiryuvanoy characteristic to the test SPECapc 3ds max8 v.1.3 є hour vykonannya tasks. On the basis of the hour of the last minute, the task of creating and editing the scene is provided with an integral indicator of the productivity of the video card, standardizing according to the results of the current reference PC. Similarly, on the basis of the hour of rendering of the final scenes, an integral indicator of the productivity of the central processor is provided, which is also normalized according to the results of the first reference PC.

Benchmark SPECapc for Maya 6.5 for platform testing with Alias ​​WaveFront Maya 6.5 add-on for processor, video card and disk subsystem. The test is composed of 30 subtests.

The result of the test is presented in two normalized warehouses: normalized processor productivity and integral normalized productivity. When investigating the integrated productivity, the following coefficients are introduced: for testimonials from the video card destinations - 0.7; for test tests with pressure on the processor - 0.2, and for test tests with pressure on the disk system - 0.1.

For the purpose of normalizing the results of the test, a reference PC with an Intel Xeon 2.4 GHz processor, 2 GB of PC800 ECC RDRAM and an NVIDIA Quadro FX 1000 video card is tested.

Benchmark POV-Ray 3.7 Beta 17 assignments for assessing the speed of rendering and the main focus in the test lies on the processor. The test zastosovuetsya vbudovaniya benchmark, and the result of yoga є shvidkіst Rendering PPS (Pixel Per Second).

Test CINEBENCH 9.5 assignments for testing graphic cards and processors and allows you to set rendering speed. The new winner is the CPU Benchmark test, and the final result is the smoothness of rendering when all processors of the system are stuck (for rich processor systems), which is evident in the CINEBENCH unlimited units.

SPECViewperf 9.0.3 is a set of tests designed to determine the productivity of the graphics subsystem in professional OpenGL add-ons. Vіn traditionally win for testing graphic stations and professional video cards, which results in a significant world lie in the productivity of the processor.

The results of the test are one of a kind (unlimited), as they indicate how many times in each test the productivity of a PC, which is tested more than the productivity of a standard PC.

Processing digital photos

To evaluate the productivity of the processor when working with digital photo editing programs, a script for Adobe Photoshop CS2 was installed. For a new image (digital photograph) in TIFF format, filters are sequentially superimposed and the total hour of the end of all operations is restored. The result of the test is the hour of the task, the turns are in seconds.

Video coding

A group of tests for evaluating the productivity of video coding was compiled by popular software converters and codecs. Five additions have been made: XMPEG 5.0.3, DivX 6.4 Converter, TMPGEnc 2.524, MainConcept MPEG Encoder 1.51 and MainConcept H.264 Encoder v. 2.0.

The XMPEG 5.0.3 utility was stuck on a pair with the DivX 6.4.1 Codec. With help of video clip trivality 24 with a size of 51.8 MB in MPEG-2 format with a separate size of 1920x1980 pixels and a bitrate of 18,000 Kb/s, converted into an HD video file with a size of 36.5 Kb of 78 bits

Utilіta DivX 6.4 Converter for vikoristovuvalasya konvertuvannya vіdeoklіpu rozmіrom 51.8 MB formatі in MPEG-2 of rozdіlnoyu zdatnіstyu 1920x1980 pіkselіv i bіtreytom 18,000 Kbіt / s from vіdeofayl Divx rozmіrom 11 MB i rozdіlnoyu zdatnіstyu 1280. Utilіta DivX 6.1.1 Converter vikoristovuvala profіl High definition.

The TMPGEnc 2.524 utility is recognized for converting AVI files to MPEG format for burning to DVDs. Our output is an AVI file with a size of 416 MB and a triality of 2 x 1 s converted to an MPEG-2 (m2v+wav) video file with a size of 115 MB in DVD 4:3 NTSC format. Allowed frames to be set equal 720x480 pixels, bitrate - 8000 Kbps, speed of creation - 29.97 fps.

The MainConcept MPEG Encoder 1.51 utility is also recognized for converting AVI files to MPEG format for burning to DVDs. Our output is an AVI file with a size of 416 MB and a triality of 2 x 1 s, converted to an MPEG-2 (mpg) video file with a size of 111 MB in DVD 4:3 NTSC format. Frame rate - 720x480 pixels, video rate - 29.97 fps, video code rate - 8000 Kbps.

For help utility MainConcept H.264 Encoder v. 2.0 output AVI-file with a size of 416 MB and a trivality of 2 x 1 with the help of the H.264 High codec converted to an MPEG-2 (mpg) video file with a size of 295 MB in DVD 4:3 NTSC format. Allowed frames to be set equal 720x480 pixels, speed of creation - 29.97 fps.

Test results

The results of the one-by-one testing of the processors are presented in Table. 2.

Table 2

It was clear that it is difficult to analyze such a large number of data, so we decided to split the test results from logical groups and calculate the integral normalization indicator of productivity from the skin test group. In order to normalize the results, we used the results of the Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600, so the results demonstrated by this processor were taken as one.

The first logical group of tests is the whole game program. In this case, the integral indicator of productivity rose as an average geometric in terms of normalized results in all games (benchmark 3DMark06 did not break). The 3DMark06 test was wrong for us, but the result is weakly correlated with what is expected from real games.

The next logical group was the test of video coding. XMPEG 5.0.3, DivX Converter 6.4, TMPEGEnc 2.524, MainConcept H.264 Encoder v.2.0 and MainConcept MPEG Encoder v.1.51 have been upgraded before. The integral indicator of productivity is calculated as an average geometrical result in all tests. Other tests were not to be combined with logical groups, which are due to their variability and achieve different results, which are weakly correlated one with one.

Normalization of the results for such a simplified look is presented on the diagram.

Now let's analyze the taken data.

Let's take a look at the test results in games. As a matter of fact, a dual-core processor can't just outperform a dual-core one, but the program can't outperform it by about 10%. Therefore, the fact that a core processor for targeting other PC games is no more than a myth. Today, there are no cities, as they could have taken precedence over the stagnation of nuclear architecture.

Tse, obviously, does not mean that the stench will not appear tomorrow. Prote for modern igor vikoristannya chotiryadernogo processor є nedozіlnym.

The results of the game synthetic test 3DMark06 are reduced to the opposite versions. The increase in productivity 3DMark06 CPU Score is 58%, which is even worse. True, the yogo integral result (3DMark Score) is modest - the increase in productivity is only 5%, it is about the increase, and not about the decrease in productivity. Once again, we guess that the 3DMark06 test is a little disruptive in terms of life and works on presenting the results of the test about those that the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor can outperform in game add-ons, but it would still be wrong.

The next test is PCMark05. Yogo results are still ambiguous. In PCMark05 CPU Score, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor showed a productivity increase of 56%, the prote іntegral result of this test (PCMark05 Score) however for both processors. On the right, the lower PCMark05 CPU Score offsets the lower PCMark05 Memory and PCMark05 Graphics. Therefore, it is put up to this test, just like before a comprehensive test, which analyzes the productivity of the PC as a whole, then it should be assigned, which for the set of tasks, which are scored in the PCMark05 test, a system based on the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 core processor cannot outperform the system based on Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600 processor

In the CrystalMark 9.0 Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 test, demonstrating an unbelievable increase in productivity. So, the high score (Mark) is up by 26%, and the results of the test tests, oriented to the processor engagement (ALU, FPU) are down by 77%.

Now let's take a look at the results of testing with some 3D programs (SPECapc 3ds max8 v.1.3, SPECapc for Maya 6.5, POV-Ray 3.7 Beta 17, CINEBENCH 9.5 and SPECViewperf 9.0.3).

In the SPECapc 3ds max8 v.1.3 test, in the tasks involved in rendering the final scenes, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor allowed an increase in productivity by 46%, which is a good indicator. At the same time, the tasks that are working on the windows of the projections (rotation, transformation, scaling thinly), not an increase, but a 10 percent program in productivity were taken away.

In the SPECapc for Maya 6.5 test, which does not render the final scenes, we took a similar picture - a 7% drop in productivity.

In the POV-Ray 3.7 Beta 17 test, which is the key to rendering speed, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor provided an 81% increase in productivity.

A similar picture was also observed in the CINEBENCH 9.5 test, de-violating rendering slickness. The choti-core processor, allowing for an hour of rendering, is 48% equal to the dual-core one.

The SPECViewperf 9.0.3 test has an integral result for the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor, which we have designated as the geometric average of the normalized results of all subtests, by 5% less, lower for the Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600 processor. This test, of course, is intended for testing professional video cards, but, as we already intended, this result should be left to the processor, and in this case, the presence of a core processor does not lead to increased productivity.

In tests that imitate scientific research, the results are ambiguous. In the Science Mark 2.0 and Super_PI/mod 1.5 XS Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 tests, demonstrating a decrease in productivity by 7 and 3% apparently. However, the problem is, shvidshe, the tests themselves, and the processor. On the right, in that these tests are single-threaded and nasty, they are paralleled on a sprat of cores. The fact that rich-nuclear architecture will allow them to take the increase in productivity from them is not brought to light.

The SunGard Adaptiv Credit Risk test is no longer a cost-free utility, but a serious program, recognized for approval by great corporations and, more importantly, oriented towards rich processor servers. In this period, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor is showing its success all over the world - the increase in productivity is 79%!

When working with the Adobe Photoshop CS2 add-on, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor, allowing you to take off even if not great (only 16%), but still increase productivity. And the axis іz program ABBYY FineReader 8.0 Pro for recognition of the text situation is reversed. At times, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor resulted in a 5% decrease in productivity.

Data archiving with the help of the 7-Zip 4.42 archiver also gave a slight (4%) drop in productivity when the core processor was stuck, and the tasks for audio conversion with the Lame 4.0 codec won't drop even 9%.

It is necessary to test one respect for archiving data and audio converting. In principle, in these tests, you can try to reveal the advantages of rich nuclear architecture. For whom it is necessary to launch a program session at the same time. For example, if you need to convert a bunch of WAV files, you can run a bunch of sessions at once (you should try to write a different BAT file) and convert a skin file with a different session. In short, it’s better to know the correct software shell for the codec, so that it would “smart” the robot automatically. In this case, the core processor will rightly allow you to speed up the conversion of audio files.

The rest of the group of tests, which we didn’t have to look at, are the programs for video coding. At this point, all the add-ons have a choti-core processor demonstrating their superiority. Depending on the specific program and the format of the video data, the increase in productivity is from 10 to 66%.

Visnovki

So, how can you look for the results of the test carried out? Chotiryoyaderny processor Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 is not true in our opinion. But, perhaps, the whole story is that, under the influence of the new homeland of dual-core Intel Core 2 Duo processors, the stench was even more dependent.

In this hour of potentiality, implemented in the processor Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700, it is simply impossible to open up, shards of add-ons, building materials to win in the light of the processor's core architecture, today it is not so rich. The blame is placed on the task of video coding and the final rendering of three-dimensional scenes, in case of violations during the test, the success of the chotiryaderny processor was not transverse. Obviously, Intel Core 2 Duo would be correctly positioned as a processor for graphics stations and PCs, which is important for video processing. In other situations, the cost of the choti-core processor can be summed up.

For home coristuvachіv PCs based on a choti-core processor - tse, svidshe, exotic or, as always, one of the ways to start drinking in the eyes, but the need is not required.

Most PCs with the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor upgrade traded for PC performance with the Intel Core 2 Extreme X8600 processor upgrade. So positioning yoga as a processor for high-performance home PCs is still ahead of time. Obviously, an insignificant drop in productivity, which can be seen in games and other programs, cannot be noted in the eye. All one computer based on the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor is a highly productive solution. The power is only in the fact that it is important and to whom it is needed, as a dual-core processor allows you to take more productivity while executing all tasks, for the sake of rendering and video coding, moreover, for less pennies for less energy saving.

The prote computer is not built for one rіk, but a chotiryaderna architecture is a garniture road in the future. The Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor is ahead of its time, but tomorrow the situation may change. At the same time, the software security infrastructure is not ready to zastosovuvat the power of chotiria core processors. But the fact that all new programs will not be a problem will support rich nuclear power does not mean any doubts.

It is often better to say a little that the achievements of a rich nuclear architecture can be accelerated even today - not a trace of a bright future. All you need for this is to call to the robot in a rich task mode, if on the computer one hour a copy of various programs is downloaded, for example, an anti-virus scan and an audio coding or a gra. Partly true, ale ... less than partly. Even more serious, but no more than a marketing myth. To convert to cioma, try running a video conversion task (for example, converting a movie for PocketPC) and fix it in Microsoft Word, or just spread solitaire on your computer. Tsіkavo, through skilki khvilin you tse nabridne? It’s worthwhile for an hour that the majority of PocketPC video converters (for example, Omniquiti Lathe 1.5) can be single-threaded and can’t be used overnight for a few processor cores, so one core is fully occupied, and the solution is idle. It would be better if you don’t care about anything when putting other tasks on other cores. Yakby is not alone. On the right, in the fact that in similar scenarios, the system's swidcode as a whole is not even the processor's capabilities - even a hard disk, memory and tire size with a bordered throughput building. Great is the possibility that two or more add-ons, which are convoked at once, begin to compete for one and the same (although not processor) PC resources, which cannot be allowed to increase productivity.

Previously, we were told that the efficiency of the choice of a choti-core processor in home PCs can be achieved with a string. However, another important aspect has not yet been considered - marketing, which, as you know, is the engine of progress. It doesn’t really matter if the new processor is a rotten one or a good one, - as the company needs marketing wines, then there will be no exceptions.

Why was Intel so quick to release a new, choti-core processor, so the Intel Core 2 Duo family processors have become insane market leaders? The food is already not banal and it’s easier to finish it. First, for Intel, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor is a kind of by-product of development, which does not involve serious financial losses: from a technological point of view, the choice of Conroe dual-core processors and Kentsfield dual-core processors is of little concern. Vіdmіnnostі є є vіdmіnnosti і less at the stage of packing, yak vygotovlyаєєєєєєєєєє at spetsіlіzovanіh plants in Malaysia. Intel has already worked out the same process: for the technology of packing two dual-core crystals into one case, Xeon server processors do not look like Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processors.

It's true, since the development of several core processors will not require annual additional financial investments, then why not tell it?

In another way, the appearance of a choti-core processor is the legacy of Intel's ambitious plans. Once you win the title of the leader of the industry, bring to the market a product that is not available in competitors - it's an expensive cost. And in fact, from the technological point of view of the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700, there is no doubt about it.

And, in our opinion, there is another, third reason for such a hasty release of a choti-core processor. The competitive struggle between Intel and AMD on the skin is one company's only job to do this. And, obviously, AMD couldn't help reacting to the release of the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 choti-core processor. About tse miraculously knew from the company Intel, like, vtim, and about those that support AMD nothing. What did it come from? The release of the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 choti-core processor spurred AMD to create a marvelous and a priori failed solution under the code name AMD 4x4, which transferred two dual-core processors to replace one choti-core one. Why is it wonderful? By stretching the rest of the rock, the AMD company vaguely tried to bring its leadership to the low-powered processors. In addition, she has already voted that increasing the clock frequency is not a method of increasing the productivity of processors. The release of the AMD 4x4 solution to supervise the policies that the company conducts. On the right, in the fact that before energy-saving platforms it is not possible to use it, it is possible to save a lot of electricity and help even an efficient (and also, even more powerful) cooling system. In addition, the new AMD dual-core processors (FX-70, FX-72 and FX-74) are no different, as the old processors have been re-engineered in the new case, which is supported by the Socket F (1207 FX) rose.

Normalization of the results of the por-vnyal testing of processors

The first results of testing the AMD 4x4 solution, taken in American and European testing laboratories, allow the same to be done. In terms of performance, the AMD 4x4 solution with two AMD Athlon 64 FX-74 dual-core processors running the solution based on one Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 dual-core processor is practical in all tests. At the same time, the power supply of the AMD 4x4 system is approximately twice as high, but before that, it will take a lot of exhaust (not lower than 600 W) power blocks. The AMD 4x4 variability is significantly higher than the solution based on the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 processor. In such a rank, as a reminder of the question: “And who needs the decision?”, It’s clear. The appearance of the choti-core processor Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 tempted AMD to spend a penny and launch a new family of dual-core processors on the market, as if doomed to failure.

Singingly, leather koristuvach knows little about the computer, sticking with a bunch of unreasonable characteristics when choosing a central processor: technical process, cache, socket; rushing for joy to friends and acquaintances who are competent in the nutrition of a computer room. Let's take a look at different parameters, because the processor is the most important part of your PC, and the understanding of this parameter will give you confidence when buying and a little more.

central processor

The processor of a personal computer is a microcircuit, as it performs any operations with data and controls peripheral devices. Vіn mіstsya near the special silicon building, called the crystal. For a short understanding, vicorist abbreviation. CPU(CPU) or CPU(From English Central Processing Unit - central extension). On the current market of computer components, there are two competing corporations, Intel and AMD, yakі uninterruptedly take the fate of the runners for the productivity of new processors, constantly fully technologic process.

Technical process

Technical process— ce rozіr, vikoristovuvaniy pіd hіrbnitstva protsesorіv. Vіn defines the size of the transistor, the unity of which is є nm (nanometer). Transistors, in their own way, form the internal basis of the CPU. The bottom line is that a thorough preparation technique allows you to change the range of these components. As a result, the processor dies are spaced more richly. If you want to improve the characteristics of the CPU, then in the parameters you need to specify the technical process. For example, the Intel Core i5-760 is behind the 45 nm process technology, and the Intel Core i5-2500K is at 32 nm, depending on the information, you can judge about the current processor’s speed and overturn the productivity of its successor, but when choosing a number of wrong parameters

architecture

Such a characteristic is also powerful for processors, like architecture - a set of powers, powers of a whole family of processors, as a rule, which is released by a long stretch of rich lives. In other words, architecture is the whole organization and internal design of the CPU.

number of cores

Core- The main element of the central processor. Vono є part of the processor, building one batch of commands. The cores are controlled by the size of the cache memory, the bus frequency, the cooking technology, etc. The processors with the skin stepping technical process give them new names (for example, the core of the AMD processor is Zambezi, and the Intel processor is Lynnfield). With the development of technologies for the selection of processors, it became possible to place more than one core in one case, which significantly increases the productivity of the CPU and helps to win a number of days a day at once, as well as win a few cores in robotic programs. Multi-core processors I can probably get better at archiving, decoding videos, working with current videos. For example, processor lines Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad from Intel, which have dual-core and choti-core CPUs, obviously. At the moment, mass-produced processors with 2, 3, 4 and 6 cores. There is more victoriousness in server solutions and is not needed for a cross-cooked PC.

Frequency

Okrim the number of cores contributes to productivity clock frequency. The value of this characteristic reflects the CPU productivity of the number of cycles (operations) per second. Another important characteristic bus frequency(FSB - Front Side Bus) demonstrates the speed of data exchange between the processor and the computer periphery. The clock frequency is proportional to the bus frequency.

socket

If the future processor is upgraded with the motherboard, it is necessary to know the socket. Socket is called rose, for which the CPU is installed on the motherboard of the computer. Different sockets are compatible with the single type of CPU, so the rank of leather roses allows the installation of a single type processor. Intel uses LGA1156, LGA1366 and LGA1155 sockets, while AMD uses AM2+ and AM3.

Cash

Cash- About the memory with a great speed of access, necessary for the quickening of the age to the data, which is constantly rebuying from the memory with a lesser speed of access (operational memory). When choosing a processor, keep in mind that increasing the size of the cache memory positively affects the productivity of more programs. The cache of the central processor is tripled ( L1, L2 and L3), spreading without interruption on the processor core. The new one uses data from the operational memory of a greater high speed of processing. Varto is also wrong, that for rich-core CPUs it is required to have cache memory of the first level of one core. The cache of the other equal wins similar functions, with a lower speed and a larger volume. If you can use a processor for resource-intensive tasks, then a model with a large cache commitment of another equal will be shorter, better, which for rich-core processors requires a total commitment to the L2 cache. The L3 cache is equipped with the most productive processors, such as AMD Phenom, AMD Phenom II, Intel Core i3, Intel Core i5, Intel Core i7, Intel Xeon. The cache of the third level is the least swidcoded, but it can reach 30 MB.

Energy supply

The energy saving of the processor is closely related to the technology of yoga production. Due to changes in nanometers in the technical process, increase in the number of transistors and increase in the clock frequency of processors, an increase in the power consumption of the CPU is required. For example, processors of the Core i7 line from Intel can run up to 130 and more watts. The voltage that is applied to the core clearly characterizes the energy saving of the processor. This parameter is especially important when choosing a CPU for the desktop as a multimedia center. In modern models of processors, different technologies are used, which help to fight against low power supply: temperature sensors that can be used, systems for automatic control of the voltage and frequency of the processor cores, power-saving modes with a weak load on the CPU.

Added capacity

Modern processors have added the ability to work in 2 and 3-channel modes with operational memory, which signifi- cantly signifies on її produktivnosti, as well as improve a larger set of instructions, which raises the functionality to a new level. Graphics processors process the video of self-tapping, by themselves robbing the CPU, zavodyak technology DXVA(Vіd English DirectX Video Acceleration - accelerated video component DirectX). Intel's best guessed technology turbo boost dynamic change in the clock frequency of the central processor. Technology speed step manages the CPU power supply depending on the activity of the processor, and Intel Virtualization Technology hardware creates a virtual environment for a number of operating systems. Also, modern processors can be divided into virtual cores using additional technology Hyper Threading. For example, a dual-core processor has a built-in clock speed of one core to two, which combines the high productivity of processing data for the help of four virtual cores.

Thinking about the configuration of your future PC, do not forget about the video card that її GPU(In English Graphics Processing Unit - graphic extension) - the processor of your video card, which is responsible for rendering (arithmetic operations with geometric, physical objects only). The higher the frequency of the second core and the frequency of the memory, the less pressure on the central processor. Particular respect for the graphics processor may be shown by gamers.

Zavdannya at the infamous lookout

Our post-readers, perhaps, will remember a series of articles that appeared in 2009 under the headline "Influx of different characteristics on the swidcode processors of modern architectures." We looked at the number of spherical processors in vacuum, based on the analysis of their swidcodes, to add up a deep hostility about the speed of real processors and factors that are injected into it. In the new roci, after the release of the offensive version of the methodology, we have creatively reworked the testing of the earlier method with a little bit of the great realism of the dosledzhuvanih food, so that the simulation of the situation can be real. Like the last time, we often wrote against AMD products, and for ourselves - against the newest platform: Socket AM3. Fortunately, the maker of this platform will achieve a long life, the popularity of її in the middle of the koristuvach is great, that name of the company has moved more in the distance, the lower competitor - from the point of view of sorting after the alphabet. :)

At first glance, AMD's latest line looks a little chaotic (we would say that in all futures...), you can understand the protologic of the virobnik: understand, richly accept defects, sell the processor, lower the cost. And to that, modifications with different obsyagi and types of caches and the number of cores, the company allows you to do it richly, obviously, it’s great to come up with a smart idea for an instance with a “defective” kernel or a cache, I’ll name it, the kernel or a part of the cache is still turned on, but the processor . :) The leaders of this miraculous, innovative policy of AMD, the lines of AM3-processors developed by it, have as many as three different dual-core ones - with different bindings of the L2-cache, and navigating from the presence of L3; two modifications of trinuclear ones - with L3 and without it; and again three modifications of the chotiria-nuclear ones - with L3 and without it, and also with different L3 bindings. In addition, a single-core Sempron is produced for the AM3 platform. Having summarized in one small table the main technical characteristics of the CPU for the AM3 platform, we may have a chance to understand what kind of logic is in the AMD lineup:

Also, we can hope to increase the logical “more expensive” from 1 core to 6, which is accompanied by variations on the volume of the L2 cache, as well as the visibility or availability of L3 and its total volume. With any amount of L2 AMD "plays" on apparently weak processors (dual-core), and then, as a universal "scrambler of everything", the introduction of L3 is victorious. Also, two equally amazing processors can be considered: Phenom II X2, which, with only 2 cores, can have a gigantic L3 cache, and, finally, Athlon II X4 - which, with 4 cores, is good for yoga. For an idea, the first one is guilty of being an ideal option for an old software without rich thread optimization (if you want another core is not necessary ...), and the other one is a processor for optimists, as they support those that a 4-core CPU can overcome all processors a smaller number of cores, regardless of the size of the cache. So it won’t be so - let’s marvel at the results ...

Vidpovidno, the most important thing is to look at the analysis of productivity:

1. Increasing the number of cores with the same cache obsession:
   1. from 1 core to 2;
   2. from 2 cores to 3;
   3. from 3 cores to 4;
   4. from 4 cores to 6.
2. Increasing the number of caches with the same number of cores:
   1. on 2-core processors (different L2 expansions, L3 expansion);
   2. on 3-core processors (adding L3);
   3. on 4-core processors (additional L3, different L3 expansions).
3. Variations on the theme “fewer cores, more cache”:
   1. 1-core processor in pairs with 2-core;
   2. 2-core processor in pairs with 3-core.

* - toil on uvazi: on a single core.

Yak bachite, ґrunti for doslіdzhen - neorane field. True, in order for us to be able to fix our respect for ourselves by listing more factors, having cleaned everything up, we still needed to make one curtsy to the “syntheticity” bik - regardless of the fact that such a CPU model is true, all the participants in the tests practiced single core frequency: 2.6 GHz. Vtіm, not so bad: Athlon II X3 / X4, Phenom II X3 / X4 with such a frequency is effectively used, there are not only 2600 MHz Sempron, Athlon / Phenom II X2 and Phenom II X6.

As it was said above, the testing was carried out according to the new methodology of 2010, with some minor modifications:

1. The shards of the task before us had to be done on a larger scale and tsіkave, and all the participants of the tests behaved more decently, and surprisingly practically did not demonstrate the unreasonable logic, we adopted a voluntaristic decision to vote all the optional tests permanently - basically, the stench will be taken away in this rank fate on the high grounds at the middle ball.
2. The shards of a deak are a lot of looked at processors, so it’s more motion, “virtual”, and really don’t vibrate, for a given cycle, for the clarity of alignment, it’s a reference to your own standard (100-point) processor, among the quiet, who took the fate of themselves in this series tests: AMD Phenom II X4 810.

Likewise, it is possible to deal with an unsettled first topic, as we have seen it: it is obvious that food is not in the first place on the list, for no reason to marvel. Here you just happen to tell us how chaotic it is in the sequence of the output of the series: there will be a simple “working moment” - the series appears in this sequence, in order to become available to analyze the results in them. Unfortunately, the breadth of our method of testing will lead to one inevitable shortcoming: the tests will take a long time to go. Evidently, we had to sacrifice efficiency for the sake of beauty, the first series (for logic, we would have started the next match for the fate of Sempron), you had a chance to check for about a month, then it’s ready at the same time. We vyrishili, navpaki, to sacrifice beauty for the sake of efficiency, and, spodіvaєmosya, you will understand us. Before that, the format of the ninth test was: “one article - one opinion on a specific food”, - it was a whole match for such an approach: there are no “important” and “unimportant” meals, skin from them in their own way, and skin melodiously know your reader.

Otzhe, let's do it. In this series, we can look at it, like it was about it, one simple and specific food: what is a 3-core processor, in which the core on the skin falls on 512 kilobytes of the L2 cache, superiority over the dual-core CPU, on the skin, the core falls 2 times more for the L2 cache - 1024 kilobytes? The pros of the first one have an additional core. On the other hand, on the other hand, the core can be worked out under the obligation of paying tribute. The situation, meanwhile, is not so obvious as to be seen at first glance.

3D visualization

So-so, until the nutrition about the non-obviousness of the situation. Surprisingly, while visualizing a trivial picture, only one packet out of six shots took away the harshness of the appendage nucleus, and the 5th axis to change the volume of L2 reacted even more critically. It was sensible, sensible, what was the reason for this: for all the stench, the stench simply could not raise the third core, and it stood idle. Well - commendable to the 3ds max retailers for good optimization, but at the same time we can state: the stench is still in a clear minority.

Trivial scene rendering

In this group, the increase in productivity by adding one more core is close to ideal, but despite rendering, this fact does not mean the same thing: 512 kilobytes of L2-cache for cores with a large number of drives, because. the scene breaks down to finish the rubbish in parallel with the shaping of the pieces.

Science and engineering studies

The situation is folded: CAD engineers, calling for everything, operate with great promises of information at the prank, and the third axis of the core does not interfere (for the sake of justice: stink and friend often ignore ...). "Showed" badly threaded optimizations of Maya, Mathematica (guessing that since 2010 it was the best for this package of threading-optimizations, the variant of the MMA test) and MATLAB, for which a high score in the group of vivivs among the leaders of the CPU and 3-cores.

Raster graphics

The difference of ±1 cm is entirely within the reach of the swindler, so we only have to see the cash-loving ACDSee and a lot of Photoshop optimizations. I'm new for the account of the greater advantage of the well-optimized appendix, the 3-core is the leader in the wild ball of the group.

Squeeze data

Our compilation test (taken so theoretically...) supports up to 16 streams at a time, which won't surprise the processor with a large number of cores.

Java

It’s new, an unknown group of tests, there are no statistics for any other, but to get a banal result: two benchmarks gave a small advantage to the third core, and the third didn’t mention any difference.

Audio encoding

Tests for audio coding speed, beginning in 2009, took off a wonderful rich streaming optimization for the dbPoweramp package's algorithm, which allows you to run coding processes on the wiki, to display the vins on the system processors. In this situation, the 3-core has a big win in advance.

Video encoding

Packages for video encoding also demonstrate some rich processor optimization, including Adobe Premiere and Sony Vegas, which were not previously approved by us. Moreover, respect: two of the fortune-telling bags won one of the best in the group.

Video creation

A new group of tests produced one of the few surprises that had a sharp negative impact on the 3-core. Jumping ahead, it is significant: it seems to be about the reaction to 3 cores, and not to a change in the volume of L2, so the 4-core does not demonstrate a great drop in productivity. Possibly, maybe the phenomenon of categorical “non-perfection” by a specific PZ of the number of nuclei, the dominant type of a two-stage, was earlier such a thing.

virtual machine

Most importantly, the third core was successfully scored, only Borderlands, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., Crysis and World in Conflict do not respond to particular optimism (less than 10% increase). Not that the trend was so clear (UT3 їй, for example, super-read), but you can remember that 3 gris from the overhauled chotiriox are not new.

Zagalny ball

Scorching ball at the heart of the hour: navit іz obrazanim kesh, rich nuclear all the same in favour. Vtіm, not without juicy details: 16 tests out of 57 gave the advantage to the processor with a smaller number of cores, but more L2 per core. It’s easy to voice this fact with the steps of retrogrades and lazy nights of programmers, as it’s not good enough to take up the resources of modern processors ... and, singly, so out of it. Still, for a normal increase in rich nuclear power, it is necessary to viconate a small robot (sometimes rather big), and the great L2 sometimes calls for an increase in productivity “by itself”, without the programmer’s additional efforts. At this time, finish the trail on an optimistic note: judging by the ball, the number of lazy people among retailers is becoming less and less. As far as practical recommendations, everything is obvious: in a flash, in the case of Athlon II, 3 cores are still definitely better, lower than 2.

The processor is an important part of the computer. In order to understand which processor is shorter than intel or amd, it is necessary to designate a task, which you put in front of the computer. You can be: working with documents, reviewing media files, listing in social media and others. The more wines there will be entanglements, the processor will be blamed for them.

What is a central processor

The central processor is an integrated circuit that performs logical operations that are set. Krym tsgogo, vіn kontrolє shtu warehousing computer.

The processor looks like a rectangular wafer, made of crystalline silicon in a plastic case. Processors can vary the characteristics of frequency, productivity, bitness and other.

According to the bitness of the processor, it is important to buy 32 and 64 bits. The clock frequency is determined by the number of the simplest operations, which are performed per second and are reduced to gigahertz. The internal frequency is controlled by the microchip robot, and the call is to serve to exchange the information of the motherboard and the processor.

The processor and other components of the computer are responsible for the sum of money, for example, on the interface at the outbuildings.

There are two competitive brands on the market these days that offer the best power for PCs: Intel and AMD. The AMD processor is the cheapest option for the same specs.

If you want to use it for victorious work with documents and for felicitous purposes, to take advantage of it and watch movies and games, you will get a dual-core processor of an average intensity and an average price category, for example, AMD Athlon 2.

If you professionally work with graphic programs, process video files, you need an older processor, for example, an Intel Core i7, which is more costly.

In that case, as if you are a gamer and install it on your PC, which may be of great importance and require a large amount of resources, you better buy some nuclear power processor, which will probably be more powerful (Intel Core i7 860, i5 750, i5 750). AMD Phenom 2 X4 95x).

For professional photographers, video operators and engineers, it is better to win a six-core processor for work with trivi- mer graphics.