Intel has been very open about scaling down processors on new transistor sizes, but when will it end? Intel has talked about 32nm but nothing passed that. There is a physical limit to how small it can get before a processor leaks to much to be useful. Does anyone have an educated guess as to how small they can get before it needs to switch over to something more efficent and scaliable? Also how will Intel deal with them memory bandwidth issues of multiple cores? I mean in the sense that sooner or later they will also hit a wall with processor pins, how will they deal with that? Lucky for us both companies wont run into these problems for a while, just they are coming to be somewhat of a puzzle to me.

There's a limit coming up to how small they can go with their current process, but they can switch materials (photons, single electrons, flux capacitor, whatever), etc... and perhaps go even smaller. But yes, no matter what they do they will hit a limit, the building blocks of our universe are only so big.

this might help what your looking for. i cant tell you much technical detail on the information your asking, so wait till someone comes around with there info on that, but some of that might be answered in the link provided. (i would try and elaborate on some of the info in the link, but im about to go to bed and quite tired)

22nm is the next one down according to that article


http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2649

hope that helps

EDIT:- JumpingJ beat me to it "Ill get you next time heman"

Here is the official schedule given at the Fall 2005 IDF:

http://www.legitreviews.com/article.php?aid=234

There's also a nice little PPT for embedded techologies that shows their process techology on slide 4.

http://www.emea-distributor.com/do [...] logies.ppt

This roadmap is a little bit more aggressive than the Fall IDF numbers with all the dates pushed 1 year ahead. It's possible the PPT quotes when the process is online while IDF quotes projected product availability. The PPT also gives their prototype schedule, which is that they always plan on having prototypes at least 2 processes ahead.

When do I get my phototronic and quantum CPU?

Ahh....I always new flux capacitors were they way to go.

They already have universities running quantum computers.
They haven't gotten it to work in 8-bit yet, and further development is hampered somewhat because we haven't figured out everything there is to know about quantum physics. Although, great strides have been made.
http://computer.howstuffworks.com/quantum-computer.htm

Photonic computing is actually very similar to standard electronic computing but had been held back by the necessity of being able to cancel a ray of light with another ray of light.(like stopping a bullet with another bullet) It has been done but is hard to reproduce consistently and massproduce. Hence it is not yet practical. Strides are being made, though.

EDIT:
Sorry, forgot why I had originally started to post. The physical size limit of a transistor is reached when only 1 electron is controled by the transistor. Safe to say that is a bit off yet.

However, starting around 32nm(roughly) we will have to start worrying about "sympathetic" electron flow. So the distance between transistors could become an issue as much as the actual size.

I wanted to know about the quantum computers (The ones that miltiply q-bits).
I heard about them for years. But is that STILL just theory?
Or has SOMEONE made SOMETHING of SOMEPART that did SOMETHING SOMETIME in SOME lab SOMEPLACE?
BGP_Spook, thanks the the link. I'll be impressed to see ANY q-computer calculate ANYTHING.

My way out thoery is chips will switch to single atom vibrations powered by different powered and read by different wavelenghts of light ! kind of like a two sidded lazer powered abacus !!! lol ok so im nuts

Edit: On thinking about it maybe its not such a bad idea only switch to microwaves on one side light to read hmmm THz chip !!! fun to think about

Besides quantum computing (already mentioned by BGP) there is another possible alternative. Carbon Nanotubes. Here's a link.

The interesting thing about carbon nanotubes is they can be semiconductors, due to "Quantum Tunneling" (Link), carrying signals. They can also modify their electrical and mechanical behaviour according to the geometrical shape given.

First of all, those numbers can't be right. The Core 2 chip has about 300m transistors. So, assuming a constant die size of about 150mm^2, you're looking at about 600m transistors for 45nm, and 1.2 billion transistors for 32nm, and 2.4 billion transistors for 22nm (roughly). A 32 billion transistor die at the 22nm node would need to be about 1880mm^2!

Second, I can see the "two year cycle" continuing through 2010 with 32nm. Maybe even 2012 with 22nm. But after that, things are going to slow down. I know people have been prophesizing this for decades, but at sizes that small, single atoms become huge chunks of the transistor. Even at 65nm this is the case, as certain parts of the transistor are simply not shrinkable anymore, as they begin to consist of only two of three atoms. At below 32 or 22nm, (I would guestimate), it no longer becomes an issue of simply upgrading the lithographic process and a slight modification to the silicon wafers. It would require radical new materials and concepts to continue to decrease in size.

Then again, I could be wrong.

IBM has been playing with those for some time.
They have managed to build a 5-QBit Quantum Computer.
A couple of links (they're kinda old, but useful): Here and here.

We're currently @ 65 and not yet at a stable 45nm. Nobody really knows the effects of EM or temperature at these steps so the limit may be even before 32nm.

I have read that IBM has already created prototype 32nm chips for it next series of 'cell cpu's.... But if you follow cell, you know they are having problems with current manufacturing.... They throw out about 4 out of every 5 they make....

I have read that IBM has already created prototype 32nm chips for it next series of 'cell cpu's.... But if you follow cell, you know they are having problems with current manufacturing.... They throw out about 4 out of every 5 they make....

Exactly, and in PC CPUs is exponentially worse because they run much faster and much hotter. We haven't even tested the long term stability of 65nm since it's been around for only ~1year. 32 nm is an exciting figure but you have to think of many connections made by 1 atom, i'ts very easy for that atom to be kicked off, even in normal operation.