Kind of. IPS is a more generic term while IPW refers specifically to the power consumption, and to be honest, on modern chips this is the limiting factor, no? I mean, reducing the clockrates is the #1 method of making a low-TDP chip in laptops, and since a reduction in clock reduces power linearly for a given CPU architecture, it's not surprise why this is done.
I realise that Ghz aren't all that matter, but of course a 4Ghz CPU is going to beat a 3.3Ghz one
Nintendo Maniac 64 Wrote:Kind of. IPS is a more generic term while IPW refers specifically to the power consumption, and to be honest, on modern chips this is the limiting factor, no? I mean, reducing the clockrates is the #1 method of making a low-TDP chip in laptops
Did you just make up IPW? Because that measurement system makes no sense. Where is the time element? Instructions per second per watt would be more appropriate but in that case we just say "performance per watt" since performance is IPS. Also I don't really care about energy efficiency by itself. Only its relationship to performance.
Nintendo Maniac 64 Wrote:and since a reduction in clock reduces power exponentially for a given CPU architecture, it's not surprise why this is done.
Fixed that for you. It doesn't start to become linear until you drop below 1.2GHz (depends on the architecture).
(02-21-2013, 04:23 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]Did you just make up IPW? Because that measurement system makes no sense. Where is the time element? Instructions per second per watt would be more appropriate but in that case we just say "performance per watt" since performance is IPS.
You're right, I had a derp moment there and completely forgot about the phrase "performance per watt".
(02-21-2013, 04:23 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]Also I don't really care about energy efficiency by itself. Only its relationship to performance.
Oh right, I forgot that you had owned a dual-core Netburst Pentium
(02-21-2013, 04:23 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: [ -> ]Nintendo Maniac 64 Wrote:and since a reduction in clock reduces power exponentially for a given CPU architecture, it's not surprise why this is done.
Fixed that for you. It doesn't start to become linear until you drop below 1.2GHz (depends on the architecture).
Well that's interesting, that goes against everything I've previously read on the internet. From what I've read, lower vcore reduced power exponentially while lower frequency reduced power linearly.
It's a much weaker exponential function but it is usually exponential.
Nintendo Maniac 64 Wrote:Oh right, I forgot that you had owned a dual-core Netburst Pentium
![[Image: apply-cold-water-to-the-burned-area.jpeg]](http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/apply-cold-water-to-the-burned-area.jpeg)
Well done.
