Why continue the big fuss over die size...?

[mad-dog]

I watch the evolution of die size make it's transition from 180nm to 90nm to 45nm and the varied die sizes that each chipset mfg prefers,
I understand the evolution and realize they are increasing the processor power while decreasing the space required but where does it end and why does it continue...?
If it's just about size and power consumption then i can see a purpose in the laptop segment,
but there is practically no size or power constraints in a desktop system, so please help me understand what I'm failing to recognize as the reason for this continued technology race in the desktop segment..

 

[dasickninja]

Power usage and heat aren't factors in the desktop market? Thats news to me.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Less heat = better clocking
Less power = lower bills
Smaller die size = less materials used in manufacturing
Less materials used in manufacturing = lower price

The better the manufacturing process the more complex a CPU can get

Do you think we could have 4 cores on one processor if it wasn't for Intel's 65nm process?

Otherwise you end up with 4x4, a TWO SOCKET SYSTEM because your process isn't small enough.

If we want to go beyond 4 cores we're gonna need an even smaller process and so on.

 

[Guest]

If you make a chip that provide less heat at a given speed, you can increase the speed to match your thermal budget. Plus smaller transistor can switch faster. Plus the smaller the more room you have to add stuff like ODMC, co-processor, whatever, plus plus plus...

With the P4 Prescott, everyone realized that it wasn't true that we did not care about heat and power in desktop.

Also one of the main reason is that they use 300mm wafer, the smaller the die, the more you can pack on one wafer and the less wafer space you loose.

I think it's primarily an economic thing with tons of advantages resulting from it.

 

[jaguarskx]

If heat and power consumption doesn't matter to you then maybe you'll care about price. Think economies of scale, the more you can build, the lower the cost. A 180nm CPU coming off of a 300mm silicon wafer will be more expensive than a 65nm or 45nm CPU coming off of the same 300mm silicon wafer because fewer of them will be produced on each wafer.

 

[Julian33]

Of course die size is important. Moore's law wouldn't have held for more than a couple of years were it not for process shrinks.

 

[mad-dog]

Ok, i didn't mean to give the impression that i didn't care about heat and power consumption, i just didn't realize the connection until now.
Now i see where it all fits in to the general equation and allows the entire pc market to benefit from the reduced size, reduced power consuption, reduced cost, reduced wattage/heat, increased functionality and speed.
Thanks to all of you for enlightening me on this matter.
"I can see clearly now the rain is gone"......... 8O

 

[pausert20]

Big thing to remember is economy of scales. Each reduction in process size that Intel or AMD can do gives about a 30% to 40% reduction in production cost for each processor die. Also if you can reduce the die size from just the scaling factor where you can fit additional die on the wafer is a direct boot to the manufactures bottom line. Also, don't forget that as the die size of the processor decreases the less chance that a particle that lands on the wafer will kill a die. This means a higher number of usable dies again adding to the bottom line.

Then as others have mentioned you also can keep to Moores law, which allows new features to be added effectively at zero manufacturing cost along with improving performance.