I like the idea that people use “up to” because in theory, there is a finite chance that anything could happen due to the quantum nature of particles/waves.
It’s within the realm of mathematical feasibility that several electrons could be activated beyond their normal activation energy, causing an overall effect of the processor speeding up. Therefore they should say “up to 3e10x2 faster”. I wonder how that will hold up in court.
This isn’t necessarily quantum level behavior or even the processor isn’t “speeding up,” it’s just being used more efficiently. In this case, it’s better use of CPU threads.
I like the idea that people use “up to” because in theory, there is a finite chance that anything could happen due to the quantum nature of particles/waves.
It’s within the realm of mathematical feasibility that several electrons could be activated beyond their normal activation energy, causing an overall effect of the processor speeding up. Therefore they should say “up to 3e10x2 faster”. I wonder how that will hold up in court.
A lot of things go into benchmarks:
This isn’t necessarily quantum level behavior or even the processor isn’t “speeding up,” it’s just being used more efficiently. In this case, it’s better use of CPU threads.