Ya don't say?
Why Clock Speed Doesn?t Matter Much When Comparing Two Computer Processors (http://lifehacker.com/#!5796846/why-clock-speed-doesnt-matter-much-when-comparing-two-computer-processors)
An interesting thought considering so many people not only don't understand what clock speed actually means, much less understand the necessity of having a full well-rounded system. For instance, I would take a "mediocre" clock speed with high disk throughput and substantial amounts of memory over high clock speed, vice having all my computing bottleneck at the reads/writes of my disk as well as low memory. It's actually amusing how at work I kept asking for more and more memory on my database servers, as every time I'd get an increase in max available memory, I'd just go and re-configure the database to suck up more memory, until the SA's came to me and said "Really?" I tell ya what though, as large as my buffers and query cache is, that sucker runs lickidy split!
A good thing to point out. A Intel Pentium 4 3.80GHz is about 10x slower than a Intel Core i7-2630QM @ 2.00GHz in practical use. Its how much you can do in a clock cycle that matters when it comes to cpu performance. I'm leaving out the rest because it does get complex when you mix in other hardware. Its not easy for a normal person to pick out something and know what they are getting.
Very, very, interesting. I did not know this. Normally I'd add something like "So my blah blah blah is actually really good then?" But.. I have a craptop, its crap no matter what.
As far as I know, cache is the judgmental part of any processor nowadays.