Quote:
Originally Posted by
Galbi 
Multi-core processors splits the tasks into smaller chunks. Each core (lets say 4 cores) takes on 25% of the total load. After the 25% load is done, they go into hibernation mode, thus saving battery. Each core processor does not have to use all of its power to do the work, generating less heat and less resistance.
A single core or dual core processor, uses 100% (single core) and 50% (dual core) before going into hibernation. The less time spent on doing the tasks and the more time it is in hibernation, the less power consumption.
That is how you get better battery life.
No. Your explanation is not correct, and it just parrots Nvidia's multi-core marketing drivel.
Multi-core processors do not split tasks into smaller chunks. What splits tasks into smaller chunks are programmers coding the software. You also leave the impression that every task can be evenly split up evenly, which is not true either. Computational problems like numerical modeling, media encoding, can be split up near evenly, but even those tasks start to lose efficiency as the core count goes up.
The vast majority of software loads really stress only one core. The vast majority of multithreaded software really stress only one core. The vast majority of background processes and threads are at wait states or require very little CPU power in the vast majority of software out there.
It's true that for a constant workload, a faster processor with good idle power states can use less power than a slower processor. That's only true if the idle power state for the faster processor consumes less power. If the slower processor had lower peak power and lower idle power, guess what, it likely will consume less power overall over the same workload even though it'll take longer to finish.
Moreover, the so-called "first-to-sleep" advantage is only advantageous for constant workloads. The problem is the old adage that we find a way to fill the CPU cycles anyways. Users will end up using the device more or the software loads will require more power.
Quote:
Apple is moving to multi-core processor in the next iPhone anyway. Will you start appreciating the benefit after that happens? Most likely will.
If you haven't noticed, Apple has been using multi-core processors in iOS devices for almost 2 years now. Will 2013 iOS devices have a quad-core CPU? Who knows, but they've had dual-core CPUs since the iPad 2 in 2011.
