You can pull the frequency of a crystal resonator circuit by changing the loading capacitance, for example. You may use a varactor or any semiconductor junction. Doing so doesn't really affect phase noise.

I'm probably missing the right terminology. I would have thought the feedback loop creates jitter of its own. Phase locked VCOs are generally noisier than a crystal alone. But maybe I'm overthinking it and the loop bandwidth can be made very narrow with trimmed crystal and long integration times or whatever.

The contribution of the crystal to the overall tank circuit Q is vastly higher, by several orders of magnitude, than the contribution of the varactor diode.

So while making an oscillator steerable inevitably increases its phase noise slightly, the increase is either ignorable in practice or cancelled by the control loop itself.

Your own answer is right. For atomic clocks, the integration times of the feedback loop are typically much longer than a second.

As a counter example, a couple days ago I was to install DaVinci Resolve on a new windows installation, so I searched "davinci resolve." Since I was used to having adblocker, I just clicked the top result, which is titled "DaVinci Resolve" but actually takes you to some awful shady thing like wondershare or softonic/uptodown, I forgot.

I feel like, navigational queries or no, Google should be held liable for allowing scam sites like that to advertise. I think there was a trending HN post recently on that front.

Should the police be liable for not preventing your house from being broken into?

Did the police gives out keys to my house and give some of them to criminals? Then yes.

No? I'm not sure what the comparison here is.

> As a counter example, a couple days ago I was to install DaVinci Resolve on a new windows installation, so I searched "davinci resolve." Since I was used to having adblocker, I just clicked the top result, which is titled "DaVinci Resolve" but actually takes you to some awful shady thing like wondershare or softonic/uptodown, I forgot.

I just tried this query on chrome / android.

This is the first link on the page at the very top:

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/davinciresolve

(The product page)

The next site listed was Wikipedia.

I don't have any adblockers. I am in the US.

When people tell me this stuff about their Google searches it drives me insane, I want to know why our experiences are so different. It is regional? Is it OS, is it browser, is it something else? I want to know!

You know your search results are personalized right? If I google something and my girlfriend googles the same thing, on the same network, we get different results.

>You know your search results are personalized right?

Of course.

But these results don't seem to change on a degoogled chromium on desktop, with no google account login personalization, no account logged in, in incognito, using: Ublock origin lite, User Agent / OS Randomizer, Privacy Badger, and using a VPN to other locales.

That's why I want to know, I've been curious about this for years, and nothing I've looked at seems conclusive.

My biggest guess is country or native language, but it's been hard to pin down. I think that may be the biggest factor (with local laws contributing maybe to how search results get displayed).

I'm curious! I want to know the driver behind the bad experiences people are having with it. (I've been using it literally since it was released.)

The gap is a low narrower than those exaggerated numbers. Cortex-M goes to 1 GHz and beyond with MIMXRT117x, while loads of x86 chips down-clocked to the couple GHz or are capped lower, like laptop CPUs

What's to say they're ignorant?

Here is an excellent video showing silicon die analysis and comprehensive performance-power curves compared against other leading products. Please skim through it and skip the speculating. https://youtu.be/BCCJuOopLK8

Edit: There are also memory latency charts

While the other comments are correct to point out that majority of mobile workloads are rush to completion, many users (especially in China) still do a lot of heavy gaming on their phones. This is exactly why the newer SoCs are so interesting- that they can deliver more performance for the same power consumption. (Directly increasing run time and decreasing heating)

> many users (especially in China) still do a lot of heavy gaming on their phones

I think most children prefer to play on phones these days. Mobile gaming is huge. To the point where game loops on high-end games are optimized around thermal throttling.

To save you a potentially long scroll:

> Data is sourced from Polymarket.

So probably actually accurate given those have heavy insider trading

I came across this site which has pretty comprehensive data about PQ curves (the chart for determining CADR given filter impedance) at different noise and power levels: https://www.cybenetics.com/evaluations/fans/204/ (many other fans tested as well but I've been liking the value of P14 Pro PST)

However they look somewhat commercial and I'm not sure the funding/incentives so definitely corroborate with other sources.

Well, it's good that there's some competition within the space. More compact/correct/elegant code is simply better code, and people will catch on to that eventually. I think there is a stronger incentive to gain market share and higher profits vs. naively skimming a small additional margin by sandbagging efficiency/performance

It's not the idea of RAW that's being patented, but rather components of "Red RAW" that includes things like compressing before debayering, as the other comment points out. I also remember hearing something about Red having a patent on directly recording to swappable SSDs or something ridiculous like that as well..