1MHz

[5abr3]

Ok in the world of Morse via radio you have the shortest pulse as a dit, with a dar lasting about 3 times longer than dit. If we say that the gap between sub characters is the same length as dit, the gap between letters is the length of 2 dits and a gap between a word is 3 dits in length (the same length as a Dar) Then you'd have to use something similar to this to send the phrase 'Hello All' (spaces are placed between each character and the 3 0's on their own is where the space would be):
1010101 001 00101110101 00101110101 0011101110111 000 10111 0010111010 0010111010

So thats in it's none spaced form would be:
1010101001001011101010010111010100111011101110001011100101110100010111010

Whereas the ASCII binary is:
010010000110010101101100011011000110111100100000010000010110110001101100

Now I know this is only a character difference (and the length varies heavily on the text sent so error checking is a pain in the rear too) but you would then have to devote a lot of processing time scanning the received string looking for the '00' and '000' markers to find where each letter was, and then find out what the character was supposed to be then build the new text string.

 

[kppanic]

I think its 4 Billion times a second on each of the cores and with HT enabled that would be 4 billion on 8 simultaneously, im sure someone will correct me if wrong .

Hyperthreading is not a physical "core" therefore a hyperthreaded core will still "oscillate" at 4GHz.

 

[kppanic]

Sure I understand how HT works but as Wayne said a couple of posts ago take it that each was a separate core. In fact the frequency remains the same, its just you have 4 cores (or rooms ) at 4 Billion hz simultaneously

You know I would have had students if I had known my processor had 4 rooms going Only kidding btw v good analogy

This. The frequency of a quad core CPU will be the same as one of its core. If the four cores were employed at 100% at 4GHz it will be the same as a single chip being employed at 100% at 16GHz. Of course this is ignoring any of the "clock optimization" features of a chip. For example HT or superscaling (CPU actually performing 2 or more instructions on a single tick)

 

[Cobalt]

.....
As for CPU spread spectrum, I've no idea what it does either, so I normally turn it off. It could vary the clock speed a little, maybe a few percent, for some reason.
.....

Sorry to go off topic but if anyone is interested and I remember correctly spread spectrum settings smooth the transitions in wave-forms thereby reducing electromagnetic radiation.

I'll try to explain a bit, although my electronics/physics is rusty.

Electromagnetic waves cause a burst of EM radiation when they change from increasing to decreasing or vice-versa

Square-waves, basically the transition between 1 and 0 in computers, are the worst for EM spikes since the transition is so rapid.

Rounding the "corners" of the square-wave reduces this effect and any local EM sensitive equipment may function better. A side effect of this could be lower CPU stability, since computers need nice clean square-waves to function efficiently.

Normal operation you probably wouldn't notice any difference with it on, over-clocking on the other hand could reduce the maximum you can squeeze out of your system.

I'm not 100% sure how this is done in computers but it's roughly the idea, it's been a while so don't flame me if I'm talking out my behind

 

[Big.Wayne]

Probably better sticking to binary and a .txt file over Ethernet!

010010000110010101101100011011000110111100100000010000010110110001101100

Haha thanks for that 5abr3 . . . made me chuckle!

I've only studied a little binary so the morse code was a more real world thought, I suppose who-ever invented/worked on binary code was familiar with Morse?

If the four cores were employed at 100% at 4GHz it will be the same as a single chip being employed at 100% at 16GHz

Ok, sorry to all for confusing the example, I should have probably just used a simple [email protected] scenario . . .

So theres four cores, each core is operating at 4.0GHz

1MHz = One million Hz
1GHz = One billion Hz

4GHz = Four billion Hz

x4 = Sixteen billion Hz

So in one second on a loaded quad core @ 4.0GHz the CPU has oscillated sixteen *BILLION* times . . . . over the course of one minute thats 960 *BILLION* cycles . . . one hour would be fifty-seven thousand *BILLION* cycles and finally . . . . to get the *Magic* 8-Hour Prime95 Stability Screen your asking your SuperComputer (Quad@4GHz) to perform how many perfect fault free cycles?

Seriously I can't do the maths guys! . . . I'm not even sure if I got the above bit right, if I can understand the above scenario and the resulting figure I would be happier . . . I've never needed to know about numbers apart from salary $$$ so my comprehension is a bit fuzzy above 100K

There's also this American figure vs the UK figure which confuses me . . . help us out fellas!

 

[PhoenixUK]

So in one second on a loaded quad core @ 4.0GHz the CPU has oscillated sixteen *BILLION* times . . . . over the course of one minute thats 960 *BILLION* cycles . . . one hour would be fifty-seven thousand *BILLION* cycles and finally . . . . to get the *Magic* 8-Hour Prime95 Stability Screen your asking your SuperComputer (Quad@4GHz) to perform how many perfect fault free cycles?

If one hour is 57 000 000 000 000 then the 8hr would be 456 000 000 000 000 cycles

 

[BlackBat]

There's also this American figure vs the UK figure which confuses me . . . help us out fellas!

Keeping it simple, the SI multiple for one GHz(gigahertz) is 1,000,000,000 Hz(hertz).

 

[MikeHunt79]

I'm not really sure if 4cores at 4 ghz = 16ghz.

Aren't all the cores synched? Surely they share the same clock? Otherwise speedstep could do some mad things like vary the clock speed of each core...

As said, keep it simple...

4Khz = 4,000Hz
4Mhz = 4,000,000Hz
4Ghz = 4,000,000,000Hz

4Ghz x 60seconds x 8 hours = 1920 billion cycles, or if you prefer, 1,920,000,000,000 cycles, but remember a few cycles are needed for background services.

I'd be tempted to round it up to 2 Teracycles.

Sorry to go off topic but if anyone is interested and I remember correctly spread spectrum settings smooth the transitions in wave-forms thereby reducing electromagnetic radiation.

I'll try to explain a bit, although my electronics/physics is rusty.

Electromagnetic waves cause a burst of EM radiation when they change from increasing to decreasing or vice-versa

Square-waves, basically the transition between 1 and 0 in computers, are the worst for EM spikes since the transition is so rapid.

Rounding the "corners" of the square-wave reduces this effect and any local EM sensitive equipment may function better. A side effect of this could be lower CPU stability, since computers need nice clean square-waves to function efficiently.

Normal operation you probably wouldn't notice any difference with it on, over-clocking on the other hand could reduce the maximum you can squeeze out of your system.

I'm not 100% sure how this is done in computers but it's roughly the idea, it's been a while so don't flame me if I'm talking out my behind

Ahh, I see, so it makes the wave more sine-wave like. That makes sense to me, I can imagine this maybe being useful when using a computer in a sensitive environment... Or if you have a radio close by!

 

[Amraam]

No offense intended Wayne, but how do you have 11'000+ posts on an overclocking forum and not know what Hz are etc?

 

[PhoenixUK]

No offense intended Wayne, but how do you have 11'000+ posts on an overclocking forum and not know what Hz are etc?

With the amount of random stuff you post you should have about that many posts soon too !


Really who cares...
And we have a different forums section here too if you haven't noticed yet, some of them have completely nothing ( or almost nothing ) to do with IT or overclocking at all.

Have a look below the hardware section and you'll find them

 

[Kribby2006]

Hyperthreading is not a physical "core" therefore a hyperthreaded core will still "oscillate" at 4GHz.

Yes I know, if you had seen my previous post I said that because of the example that was given further through this thread, i.e. wayne said, imagine each was a separate core

Edit, based on your next post you had seen it lol.

Ok for the purposes of this example lets just say it's a full core . . . so eigth cores running at 4GHz basically . . . how many light bulbs flick on and off!

What is the figure?, I can't work it out myself and I need the answer expressed in words as I do not understand large numbers!

 

[Kribby2006]

This. The frequency of a quad core CPU will be the same as one of its core. If the four cores were employed at 100% at 4GHz it will be the same as a single chip being employed at 100% at 16GHz. Of course this is ignoring any of the "clock optimization" features of a chip. For example HT or superscaling (CPU actually performing 2 or more instructions on a single tick)

Sure again I know this, but as I said effectively you have four cours all running at 4GHz, I appreciate that this has the potential to do the work of a single core at 16GHZ, but the frequency is not 16GHz

 

[reiyushin]

This is a good post as we rarely think about the scale of things.

Person-House-City-Country-Continent-Planet-Solar System-Galaxy-Universe-???

We talk about such huge things, numbers, events without really giving much though to what they really mean.

 

[Corasik]

I think its 4 Billion times a second on each of the cores and with HT enabled that would be 4 billion on 8 simultaneously, im sure someone will correct me if wrong .

Not quite because Hyperthreading only kicks in when there is available execution units on the cores.

But you do have to consider that Core 2 processor cores (and i7's) are 4 issue cores, which means each core can execute 4 different instructions at the same time, and a large number of x86 instructions can be processes in a single clock cycle. The point of hyperthreading is to try and make sure that all 4 execution units (in each core) are as heavily utilized as possible.

So on a Quad core, with hyperthreading and the right software, your looking at an maximum instruction execution rate of 4(cores)x(4 execution units) x clock speed.

In reality, most applications use a broad range of instructions which may take as low as 1 clock, but some instructions take multiple clock ticks to complete.

 

[Wipster]

Amazing how speedy things go nowadays, it is always ammusing looking at the people in the Terahurtz lab they are always confused because things start to get really funky at that speed.

 

[MikeHunt79]

Amazing how speedy things go nowadays, it is always ammusing looking at the people in the Terahurtz lab they are always confused because things start to get really funky at that speed.

I imagine that there is a theoretical maximum clock speed? Surely there is a point where the electrons just cannot move fast enough?

 

[Sayso]

you been on the drink wayne?

hehe i hope so

 

[5abr3]

Wayne, I doubt Morse code was ever considered, it is too limited for anything other than pure text and requires a lot of cycles to analyse whereas binary is more standard and easier to implement on a CPU architecture as everything is the same length (defined that way).

It is possible to make a chip that transmits and receives in Morse but still isn't worth the hassle as there has been a lot of work on this binary stuff

 

[DavyBoy]

Wow, this is a really interesting thread guys.. it's completely baffled me, but interesting nonetheless!!

I didn't have a clue about any of this, it's not really the type of thing I think about tbh.

 

[alexthecheese]

My god guys, you have been having a thoroughly geekily whale of a time in here haven't you. Interesting read.