Quote:
Originally Posted by jocampo
Actually... it depends! Depends of the application and how it handles the workload.
|
The key virtue of the Kal-el processor is that it turns off cores when they're not in use. So it can be a single, dual, triple, or quad core processor depending on the software load *and* the OS.
So it very much depends.
And it depends on the available software. If the OS and apps can't make good use of the extra cores the added power won't materialize.
If we're to use automotive metaphors, the choice of a straight dual core and a Kal-el quadcore is like choosing between a 4-cylinder engine and an 8 cylinder engine with cylinder shut down. (Like the old Caddy 4-6-8).
If you rarely need the full power of the quad core (V8) why lug around the added weight (cost) of the more complex design?
In this case the issue isn't the added cost of two more CPU cores; it is a matter of using the transistor count and die cost of the added CPU cores for GPU cores. Apple chose to spend transistors on graphics rather than general-purpose code execution.
Remember, Apple knows their customers needs better than they do.
(Seriously: those extra pixels on the display don't render themselves.)