With Intel’s launch of the original Core i7, codenamed “Nehalem”, it introduced a feature to improve the top-end performance of the CPU’s beyond their referenced clock speeds. Called Turbo, if a CPU is pushed hard, the CPU can automatically increase the frequency of one or more cores in order to deliver better overall performance. Though Intel doesn’t state it as such, Turbo is equivalent to automatic overclocking.
Since the launch Core i7’s, Intel has of course rolled out Turbo into the rest of its line-up, and it’s only with the lowest-end models (typically sub-$100) that don’t support it. I’m not entirely sure just how well the Turbo feature has sold customers into a purchase, but one thing’s for certain… it sure doesn’t hurt. After all, who wouldn’t like extra performance when it’s needed… with absolutely no user intervention?
It has been long-rumored that AMD had been considering a Turbo-like feature as well, and it was confirmed by AMD late last week to be true. Like Intel, AMD will also be calling the feature Turbo (or rather, Turbo Core). It seems odd to choose a near-identical name for the technology, but either way, at least it will be clear to any consumer looking to purchase a CPU from either company that the feature is there.
Overall, AMD’s usage of the technology doesn’t seem to be far different from Intel’s. It will be first introduced on the company’s upcoming six-core processors, codenamed “Thuban”, and like Intel’s implementation, if some cores are inactive and some need an extra boost, then that’s exactly what will happen. It’s tough to predict the effectiveness of AMD’s usage compared to Intel’s, but it’s something we look forward to testing once we get one of AMD’s six-core processors in our lab.
Despite AMD’s implementation not being identical to Intel’s, it’s going to be a welcomed addition regardless. And with Turbo soon off the list, it’d sure be nice to see AMD create a HyperThreading competitor in the near-future as well (arguably, I find HyperThreading to be more effective than Turbo in many ways).
Unlike Intel’s Turbo Boost, the Turbo Core mechanism doesn’t establish multiple frequency thresholds based on the number of cores occupied or the present thermal conditions. For instance, there’s no separate peak speed allowed when only a single core is busy, nor does Turbo Core rely on sophisticated real-time thermal monitoring. AMD will define the peak Turbo Core frequency for each CPU model, and the CPU’s model will determine its behavior. All chips that bear a given model number will behave identically with regard to frequency. The particulars of the individual chip or the thermal environment won’t influence how much time the CPU spends in a boost state.