(07-25-2010, 12:41 PM)obscured Wrote: Of course cpu architectures design is a factor but if the clock is still low the through put will be low no matter how effecient of a design. I essence his cpu is weaker then a 3ghz c2d easily. So you point doesn't matter. Especially on cisc type of cpu.
No, you are wrong. Core frequency is much less important on nehalem processors. i7 720qm ranks about the same as a core 2 quad q8200 and higher than a phenom II x4 810. It has more processing power than any core 2 quad desktop processor.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.p...40+1.60GHz
The higher end laptop i7's are as powerful as the highest end desktop i7's despite being clocked only at 2.0 ghz maximum
and even without turbo boost compete with desktop i7's clocked 1.3ghz higher when comparing productivity
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2845/7
to be honest I'm just tired of explaining this to people: with amd phenom II x6 and core i7 & later processors cpu frequency will not mean anything.
There are many more factors which make these processors faster at 1.5ghz even than an older core 2 duo clocked at 5.0 ghz.
(07-26-2010, 05:16 AM)obscured Wrote: Faster then a 5ghz c2d laff.
I meant to edit, post your synthetic benchmarks as proof it's not.