question about nominal CPU clock speed

[bniu]

ok, so the C2D MBPs went all the way up to 3.06 ghz, and the 2010 MBP 15/17 went all the way up to a dual core i7 at 2.8 ghz, and now the fastest is quad 2.3 ghz. Yes, I'm aware that clock speed isn't everything and that performance has gotten better each generation. I'm wondering why does the clock speed always seem to go down each generation? Why couldn't Intel keep the i7 at 2.8 ghz for sandy bridge? and btw, does anyone know how many stages the current sandy bridge pipelines are?

 

[DWBurke811]

Don't the i7s "turboboost," or whatever stupid name they have for overclock, to something like 3.2GHz?

 

[snaky69]

ok, so the C2D MBPs went all the way up to 3.06 ghz, and the 2010 MBP 15/17 went all the way up to a dual core i7 at 2.8 ghz, and now the fastest is quad 2.3 ghz. Yes, I'm aware that clock speed isn't everything and that performance has gotten better each generation. I'm wondering why does the clock speed always seem to go down each generation? Why couldn't Intel keep the i7 at 2.8 ghz for sandy bridge? and btw, does anyone know how many stages the current sandy bridge pipelines are?

You have to remember the new i7's turboboost feature. Those 2.2's can throttle themselves up to 3.3 if I remember right.

 

[yusukeaoki]

2010 i7 was dual core, 2011 is quad core.
Huge difference.

Besides as already mentioned, 2.2GHz Sandy can kick it up to 3.3Ghz with turbo boost technology.
The 2.3GHz to 3.4GHz.
2010 dual can only go from 2.66GHz to 3.33GHz.
You see the difference?