original: while pipelining can in theory increase performance over an unpipelined core by a factor of the number of stages -lrb- assuming the clock frequency also scales with the number of stages -rrb- , in reality , most code does not allow for ideal execution .
simplifications: while pipelining can in theory increase production over an unpipelined core by a factor of the number of stages -lrb- assuming the clock frequency also scales with the number of stages -rrb- , in reality , most code does not allow for ideal implementation . while pipelining can possibly increase performance over an unpipelined core because of the number of stages -lrb- assuming the clock frequency also scales with the number of stages -rrb- , in reality , most code does not allow for perfect action . while pipelining can increase performance of a factor of the number of stages , most code does not allow for ideal execution . while pipelining can in theory increase performance over an unpipelined core by a factor of the number of stages in reality , most code does not allow for ideal execution . while pipelining can in your mind -lrb- but maybe not in real life -rrb- increase performance over an unpipelined core by a factor of the number of stages -lrb- assuming the clock frequency also scales with the number of stages -rrb- , in reality , most code does not allow for ideal execution . while pipelining can in theory increase performance over an unpipelined core by a factor of the number of stages -lrb- provided the clock requency also scales with the number of stages -rrb- , in reality , most code does not allow for ideal execution . while pipelining can increase performance over an unpipelined core by a factor of the amount of stages , in reality , most code does not allow ideal execution . assuming the clock frequency also scales with the number of stages , theoritically pipelining can increase performance over an unpipelined core by a factor of the number of stages but most code does not allow ideal execution in reality