2022.06.15 22:49:08 (1537175397493747712) from Daniel J. Bernstein, replying to "Ruben Kelevra (@RubenKelevra)" (1536995005834969088):
Three good reasons for users to turn off overclocking: 1. Overclocking reduces the hardware lifetime; dead hardware is a hassle. 2. Overclocking is a security risk. 3. The advertised benefit of overclocking is increasingly out of whack with the real-world benefit of overclocking.
2022.06.15 09:42:18 (1536977381998661633) from "Ruben Kelevra (@RubenKelevra)":
Surely, that was just the first thing I could think of which is slow when I'm on battery. The point of turbo on the other hand is, that most code is not optimized to be heavily multithreaded and most users don't spend the whole day running it. It's bursts like this which...
2022.06.15 09:42:40 (1536977476714381315) from "Ruben Kelevra (@RubenKelevra)", replying to "Ruben Kelevra (@RubenKelevra)" (1536977381998661633):
... is the needed performance and results in the perceived speed.
2022.06.15 10:05:22 (1536983188353888258) from Daniel J. Bernstein, replying to "Ruben Kelevra (@RubenKelevra)" (1536977476714381315):
If the user is waiting then the time is long enough that the unoptimized code with (say) 2x Turbo Boost should be replaced by optimized code with (say) 4x vectorization, 4x multithreading, even though this limits Turbo Boost. The most important bottlenecks have done this already.
2022.06.15 10:52:20 (1536995005834969088) from "Ruben Kelevra (@RubenKelevra)":
But why not having both? Short performance boosts can ne delivered by turbo and optimisations do spread the load on all available threads - in this case 8.