Thanks, was not aware of that.

Quote from: LL on March 25, 2023, 01:49:39It is horrible waste of time to have just 1 core at 100% all the other cores at idle or just doing light stuff and huge thermal and wattage margin still remaining. So would be better at least 1 performance core that can be pushed to +10ghz while all the others can be normal and E cores.

You already get that with the common 1+3+4 configuration like in Dimensity 9200. 1 very fast core, 3 normal, 4 slower cores.

This one is 1+5+2 with some cache complication in the middle.

Well the implementation matter. But this is the correct configuration.

I often use plugins and a bunch of support apps many of them just tools to make maps to help me doing geographic stuff in Blender, even importing from a different file format is often a unicore function.
It is horrible waste of time to have just 1 core at 100% all the other cores at idle or just doing light stuff and huge thermal and wattage margin still remaining. So would be better at least 1 performance core that can be pushed to +10ghz while all the others can be normal and E cores.

I'm just wondering how much of this is for marketing specs vs real engineered solution finding? Apple seems content with two levels of big.little and it's still beating these on CPU performance, and some of the early three-level sandwiches at least were sharing the same voltage rails on the top two sets of performance cores so the distinction was a bit moot.

Finally a CPU with the correct core configuration: High performance for those single core work, normal cores for multi cores work, and econ cores for multi and single core light work.