Why is a triple core CPU not as fast as a two core CPU?

It should be

And you're 3 cores, and each core is your friend has fewer cores than you, and each core you see.

It's because of AMD's Cool N Quiet technology!

In fact, Cool'n'Quiet first appeared in early 2002. On January 18, 2002 in Tokyo, AMD announced that it had used a low-power technology for its new processor, the Athlon, XP, which was named "Cool 'N'Quiet Technology" (CNQ). This technology allows the processor to change its own frequency depending on the operation performed, reducing the heat generated by the processor and reducing the workload of the CPU fan.

This low-power version, the ATHLON XP 1500, is driven at a voltage of 50W, which is lower than the standard ATHLON XP 1500+ (which consumes 60W at a driving frequency). In addition, the low-power ATHLON XP 1500 can dynamically adjust the operating frequency from 300MHz in 50MHz increments to further reduce power consumption according to the application load (the actual adjustment level is set by the PC manufacturer).

But this technology is rarely seen by the average consumer. It is reported that this low-power ATHLON XP is only a completely OEM-oriented product, and there is almost no circulation in the retail market, so many people do not know about it. However, this will change dramatically this year, with CNQ technology being used in many of AMD's Athlon-64 processors.

So, with the ATHLON 64 coming out on the market this year and the use of the ATHLON 64 in many computers, there will be a lot of people who will be able to see and use the technology.

You've turned on AMD's cool and quiet technology, that is, Cool N Quiet, which is turned off under the BIOS, and the triple core is not as fast as the two-core fast can not be seen from the frequency alone, and the advantage of the triple core comes out when multitasking and large software.

Dizzy, now the computer is no longer the era when the frequency of operation was used to determine the winner or loser.

If you take a P4 3G CPU, compared to a new CPU that is now about 2G, P4 3G is definitely a lot behind.

First, it has to do with the working principle of the CPU, the CPU is the first to work at full capacity, and the second CPU will join the work, so the number of cores does not necessarily mean that your computer will be faster than others.

Second, it has to do with the level of the CPU, the power of your CPU is obviously not as good as your friend's dual-core.

So, how many cores there are, not the most important D, what matters is the power of the CPU. A fierce CPU, one can top a car of ordinary CPUs.

No, the number of cores is only one of the parameters that measure the performance of the CPU, there are other factors that determine the performance of the CPU:

Main frequency: In general, the higher the main frequency, the better;

Turbo frequency, when the computer processes less data, the CPU frequency will automatically decrease, when processing a lot of data, the CPU frequency will automatically rise, Core i5 and i7 support the turbo frequency function, and some AMD processors also support the turbo frequency function;

Production process: The production process greatly affects the CPU performance, and the advanced production process is still stronger than the old process even if the number of cores and the main frequency are lower than the old production process, such as the Pentium "Core Bus Interface Type:

PCI PCI (Peripheral Componet Interconnected) bus is an integral part of Pentium PC, and the theoretical bandwidth can reach 132MB s, and the typical bandwidth can reach 95MB s;

PCI-X PCI is an extension architecture for the PC bus, unlike the PCI bus, which must frequently exchange data between the target device and the bus, while PCI-X allows the target device to exchange only a single PCI-X device. The PCI-X is available in three different operating frequencies, 66MHz, 100MHz, and 133MHz, with a data rate of 1Gb S at 66MHz;

PCI Express, also known as PCI-E, is a next-generation PCI bus formerly known as "3gio.""It is proposed by Intel, its biggest feature is that the transmission rate is fast, PCI-E has X1, X4, X8, X16, PCI-X1 transmission rate can reach 500MB S, X16 can reach 8GB S;

Number of caches: The more cache levels, the better.

The higher the frequency, the stronger the computing power and the faster the speed. But this is not the case, and it depends on the computing efficiency.

Lots of crap upstairs. In fact, choosing a CPU is very simple, first the main frequency, then the core. What architecture, what cache, that's also in the case of similar frequency.

My 3G main frequency, your 1M main frequency tube, what architecture do you have, a few cores, several levels of cache, so that you can't even touch the shadow. It's like a 100-pound stone, a person who can lift 10 pounds can't hold it with your hands no matter what, no matter how skilled you are. First look at the architecture, and finally look at the main frequency, which is completely.

It's not that Intel and AMD don't want to develop the main frequency, but the heat and other circumstances restrict the further development of the main frequency before developing multi-core CPUs.

To put it simply, the main frequency is the absolute power, and the core and architecture are the skills of the capacity. Intel and others are developing how to use their power more fully because the development of power has reached a certain limit. It's like a person who has 100 pounds of strength, but at the same time faces 10 10-pound things, and can only move one or two things at a time, which is very inefficient and powerful.

And the quad-core is like 4 people with 25 pounds of strength, which still only adds up to 100 pounds of strength, but it is much faster to lift 10 things. Architecture, on the other hand, solves problems such as error correction, because the level of computing errors will also affect the actual efficiency. Multi-core is useless in DOS, but we are multi-threaded at all times in Windows, and the current programs are optimized for multi-threading, so in practice, multi-core will be faster when the main frequency is about the same.

In most cases, the quad-core will be a little faster than the dual-core main frequency, and if you just listen to songs on the Internet, the difference is not obvious. This is more noticeable when running certain large games or programs.

In the correct solution above, the speed of CPU mainly depends on the architecture.

CPU performance depends first on the architecture. The architecture is very important, for example, the i3 2100 is dual-core, but it is much better than AMD's X4 641, and it has a big advantage over AMD's X4 955 in some ways.

Then look at the number of cores, then look at the second slow, then look at the third slow, and finally look at the main frequency.

You send out the CPU model you see, and I can help you compare their architectures.

The main frequency doubling cache architecture is also related to the cache size, which is related to the entire machine and the memory disk.

Generally, the core can be more than can indicate that there are many tasks that can be carried out at the same time--- and it is also fast in a certain aspect.

That's not what I say. The processor dual-core or 4-core is just a name, but in fact, we don't really play its role. If you play games, the P4 is better than the dual-core, and the dual-core is better than the quad-core, it's just a gimmick.

Although it is a quad-core, the main frequency is not as high as that of the dual-core, and it must not be as fast as the dual-core, but the effect of the quad-core is shown when it handles four tasks at the same time.

I'm also from a computer company, and you explain to your customers that multi-core technology can't be based on the speed of a single file in single-tasking, and multi-core technology can only play its advantage in multi-tasking conditions, so it's not surprising that quad-core is slower than dual-core, and when you actually run multitasking, quad-core can play to its advantage.