|
|
本帖最后由 RArchitect 于 2013-9-30 21:53 编辑
the_god_of_pig 发表于 2013-9-30 21:18 ![]()
按照开发的目的，SPEC肯定是为了尽可能反映真实情况的平均值，至于能不能做到反正SPEC应该是做的最好的， ...
这是一个怪圈。
比如中国市场上很多不明就里的消费者崇拜核心数目，认为八核心大于四核心，四核心大于二核心，于是厂商就会主动做四核心A5/A7的设计，于是AnandTech才这么说：
I always thought the transition from 2 to 4 cores happened quicker in mobile than I had expected. Thankfully there are some well threaded apps that have been able to take advantage of more than two cores and power gating keeps the negative impact of the additional cores down to a minimum. As we saw in our Moto X review however, two faster cores are still better for most uses than four cores running at lower frequencies. NVIDIA forced everyone’s hand in moving to 4 cores earlier than they would’ve liked, and now you pretty much can’t get away with shipping anything less than that in an Android handset. Even Motorola felt necessary to obfuscate core count with its X8 mobile computing system. Markets like China seem to also demand more cores over better ones, which is why we see such a proliferation of quad-core Cortex A5/A7 designs. Apple has traditionally been sensible in this regard, even dating back to core count decisions in its Macs.
消费者对微架构的畸形审美，一部分是人自身的劣根性，另一部分也是某些公司恶性的营销宣传，自酿苦果，谎言重复一千遍就是事实。
安兔兔的问题也是一样。这个benchmark我没有研究过，它好不好我不敢下定论，但是学术界和工业界内部没有一个人用这玩意儿测性能的，开会时听都没听过。Intel他们是什么级别，什么benchmark好，什么不好，他们一清二楚，PPT上摆安兔兔，也是为了迎合营销需要，没办法。
如果每个消费者都具备专业级眼光，直接上各个benchmark的execution time break down，比祖坟还底层的性能分析，那谁都不会有意见。不过这也是不可能的。。。。 |
|
IP卡
狗仔卡
发表于 2013-9-30 20:38
显身卡