Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

How LGA 775 will reduce Prescott's body heat

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 12, 2004 7:07:57 PM

<A HREF="http://www.aceshardware.com/" target="_new">Here</A>.

Xeon

<font color=orange>Scratch Here To Reveal Prize</font color=orange>
March 13, 2004 6:36:52 AM

The increased current paths needed by the extra pins would negate most gains. Current routing becomes far more critical. The ball array also incorporates voltage drop caracteristics, which could be problematic. The socket change could actually generate more heat.
March 13, 2004 6:46:59 AM

Don't tell me tell them, I have already drawn my own conclusions.

Xeon

<font color=orange>Scratch Here To Reveal Prize</font color=orange>
Related resources
March 13, 2004 6:48:15 AM

I really think intel has been heading down the wrong path with prescott and its heat problems. Amd is really putting the pressure on them with all their speeds improvements, and SOI technology. It looks like things could be bad for intel through 2005 if they don't get their act together quickly.
March 13, 2004 6:51:19 AM

Um AMD still has to go threw the 0.09u move, if it's anything like the 0.13 move. AMD users are in for the same crappy ride Intel guys have been haveing as of late.

Xeon

<font color=orange>Scratch Here To Reveal Prize</font color=orange>
March 13, 2004 12:34:42 PM

naah, dont think so !
With the help of IBM i realy see no problems !
I think intel is in big trouble if 90 nano goes sort of okay for AMD.
Intel has now trouble supplying the market with Prescott`s, so i dont see them bring out a 3.4 GHz soon, unles a paper launch.


Toms Hardware Site is a joke !
March 13, 2004 9:33:27 PM

IBM isn't god dude they will suffer from the same issues that Intel suffers from. If Intel can toss 3x the money that either of these companies can at this little problem, and still not solve it yet. What in your little brain says they will walk through it easier?

Xeon

<font color=orange>Scratch Here To Reveal Prize</font color=orange>
March 13, 2004 10:38:35 PM

The shrink at 3+ gigs is a lot hotter than at 2.5 gigs. With the tbred B core, Amd went through the leakage current problem, and mostly solved it. Amd only has 1Fab to retool as well. It should be easier for Amd, but anyone thinking cakewalk will probably be supprised.
March 13, 2004 11:22:17 PM

The Mhz of each core isnt such a issue with the die shrink. It will come from skew issues since the smaller the transistor generally the faster they can switch. This is where that problem will come from for AMD.

SOI should help them but it woun't make them immune to this mess. The fact that Intel was showing 0.09u off early last year and they still haven't solved it says something.

Xeon

<font color=orange>Scratch Here To Reveal Prize</font color=orange>
March 14, 2004 4:02:16 AM

i dont think you can just becuase intel had problems, amd will too. although im sure it wont be a smooth transition, but they use differnet architectures, so its unknown how the shrink will affect things, you cant use intel as a basis for predicting how another chip might fare. amd might come out clena or have a very rough time, just depends on how well they have done thier homework so to speak and im sure they havent been blind to intel's troubles in the shrink. we wont know till we actaully see the chips.
March 14, 2004 4:08:34 AM

Quote:

IBM isn't god dude they will suffer from the same issues that Intel suffers from. If Intel can toss 3x the money that either of these companies can at this little problem, and still not solve it yet.

I think the fact IBM makes G5 CPU`s also build on 90 nano will make it alot easyer.


Also i think IBM is sort of a GOD in hardware, they are much bigger then Intel and have much more patents.
IBM did a good job with the G5, isnt it ?
XBOX2 will also be made by IBM, i think IBM has very good technologie.
If i`m incorect, please let me know.

Quote:

What in your little brain says they will walk through it easier?

Are you always this friendly ?


Toms Hardware Site is a joke !
March 14, 2004 4:19:17 AM

About as friendly as you are to anyone that recommends an Intel system. :tongue:

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
March 14, 2004 10:42:27 AM

I have talked to many person`s who still think Intel runs way cooler/faster then any AMD.
It takes me much time to convince those people the opposite around !

And then i read here some guys advising a P4 EE sytem ???
Well yeah, that makes me MAD !
But i will cool down, i have noticed there are here also people with knowledge and they will also not allow this lies.

Now back on topic, am i richt when it comes to the point, IBM is the king from technologie/90 nano ? they have proven to do it good with G5 ?



Toms Hardware Site is a joke !
March 14, 2004 1:56:52 PM

The current PPC 970 (aka G5) is made on the 130 nm process......

Future versions of the PPC 970 will be 90 nm. Intel already has a 90 nm chip (arguably). Although they're having problems, they're still closer to a finished product than IBM is. Don't know why everyone says IBM is the king of process fabs...

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
March 14, 2004 2:38:09 PM

I didnt know that, thanks for the info !
AMD says all is gooing ass planned with 90 nano, but i think that is normal, even when it wont be all sunshine they still would tell the world the same thing.
We just have to wait and see.


Toms Hardware Site is a joke !
!