In fact the idea is pretty much the same, however Intel(R) Burst technology basically is to provide on-demand, higher performance for very short intervals of time in small device form factors, while Intel® Turbo Boost Technology allows processor cores to run faster than the base operating frequency if they’re operating below power, current, and temperature specification limits on desktop and mobile platforms.
Providing higher performance on demand for a very short intervals is that i thought Turbo Boost did.
I been looking on around for what makes Burst different from Turbo Boost for some time.
Is there anything that makes them different.
I saw something (i think Toms Hardware) where it says on Turbo Boost you are guaranteed a set frequency, for example if a certain core is in Idle you know other cores will be running at a set frequency. But BIOS does not know what that frequency is.
However on Burst the frequency is determined by the BIOS.
Still a bit confused by it.
There would be to notable ways that differ Turbo Burst from Turbo Boost. For example the advertised clock frequency for a given Atom model will be its PEAK burst mode frequency. While using a cpu with Turbo Boost, this allows the CPU to exceed the advertised clock speed for short periods of time.
Another major difference is that software has extensive control over the CPU's clock frequencies. For example a handset maker using an Atom CPU could, choose to enable burst mode in only in certain scenarios where it might be needed, such as video playback for YouTube videos. Or it could leave burst mode enabled generally, but turn it off in specific situations, like during voice calls when the phone must also power other parts, i.e.: a modem.