|
|
Is multi core processing really better, or just the next computing myth?
Only a couple of years ago the MHz myth was in its prime. Intel was telling us all that speed was what counts and the Pentium 4 kept on getting faster and faster (until we all ran out of battery power). AMD came along and taught us that speed was not everything. Micro-architecture counted to, and AMD proved that slower processors could out performed Intel and the P4.
|
|
|
All that is history and long gone, the MHz wars are over. But it seems a new battle has started, Multi Core processing. AMD was the first to come out with Dual Core processor, but Intel came back quickly and there is no doubt that the Core 2 Duo Dual Core processor is the best buy for money that there is today. Once we all had single core processors. Now the norm is a Dual Core processor, who would buy a single core machine today? But technology is moving fast and Quad Core processors and coming into the main stream, the high end is talking about 8 cores, and Intel is already working on 16 Core Processors.
But is Multi Core Processing better? Or is multi-core processing the next MHz myth? Are we all assuming that the more cores the better, just as we assumed and were told that faster is better? Or maybe we are just waiting for some to come and prove to us all that more cores do not necessarily mean a better processor?
Its seems that this is still debatable. Multi-Core processing has its pros and its cons. Obviously, multi core processors are better for multi tasking, something that we all do today. But on the other hand most of the software is incapable of utilizing the resources that multi-core processors give. The multi core debate is in full steam (pro, con)and we will just have to wait and see how it plays out. |
