As expected from a chip with four performance cores. As the new vivo X100 Pro gets into the hands of keen testers, we can finally get an idea of the...
It is kinda more efficient tho.
Power consumption per clock doesn’t scale linearly.
Splitting a task into two parts and running it on two cores at 2 GHz will consume less power and generate less heat than running it on a single core at 4 GHz.
Its significantly harder to do that programming wise, but performance wise it has its benefits.
It also frees up the main high performance core to focus on more important tasks.
That’s assuming you can split it efficiently without any overhead. It’s not just a problem to be “solved” that devs don’t bother with, a lot of tasks scale poorly across threads even if you successfully multi thread them
More cores isn’t necessarily more efficient though. A lot of SOCs would prefer to boost one or two high performance cores
It is kinda more efficient tho.
Power consumption per clock doesn’t scale linearly.
Splitting a task into two parts and running it on two cores at 2 GHz will consume less power and generate less heat than running it on a single core at 4 GHz.
Its significantly harder to do that programming wise, but performance wise it has its benefits.
It also frees up the main high performance core to focus on more important tasks.
That’s assuming you can split it efficiently without any overhead. It’s not just a problem to be “solved” that devs don’t bother with, a lot of tasks scale poorly across threads even if you successfully multi thread them