Cores or Clock Speed?

Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : Cores or Clock Speed?

Author	Message
@tonymmorley Send message Joined: 10 Mar 14 Posts: 24 Credit: 1,215,128,812 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 41678 - Posted: 19 Aug 2015 \| 12:45:44 UTC Last modified: 19 Aug 2015 \| 12:46:21 UTC
	Simple question, more cores or more clock, what is going to provide the best processing speeds. Is moving up from say, 1000mhz to 1400mhz really going to amount to a significant difference? What about 1600 Cores to 2600 cores?
	ID: 41678 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

Betting Slip Send message Joined: 5 Jan 09 Posts: 670 Credit: 2,498,095,550 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 41680 - Posted: 19 Aug 2015 \| 21:23:37 UTC - in response to Message 41678.
	Cores every time but you could have a small overclock as well.
	ID: 41680 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

ExtraTerrestrial Apes Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Aug 08 Posts: 2705 Credit: 1,311,122,549 RAC: 0 Level Scientific publications	Message 41684 - Posted: 20 Aug 2015 \| 20:01:57 UTC
	For GPU crunching the two are mostly exchangable. Higher clock speed has a slight performance advantage, if there are parts of the code which can not use all shaders at once (happens seldomly in good GP-GPU programs like GPU-Grid). More cores at lower clock speed have two advantages: - you can overclock them to crunch even faster - at lower clocks a lower voltage can be used, which is more power efficient More cores also have the disadvantage of making the GPU bigger and more expensive to produce, which results in higher prices. MrS ____________ Scanning for our furry friends since Jan 2002
	ID: 41684 \| Rating: 0 \| rate: / Reply Quote

Message boards : Graphics cards (GPUs) : Cores or Clock Speed?

//