Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

P4 will scale above 10GHz

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 26, 2001 11:40:35 PM

"Over its life, it (the Pentium 4) will scale above 10GHz"

http://quickenexcite.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-5742941.h...

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =

More about : scale 10ghz

Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 26, 2001 11:56:19 PM

Sure sounds like the P4 has a long future ahead of it.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2001 12:10:00 AM

That is remarkable even my evilness is wanting to be good to amd guys cause i pitty them soo much.

SPUDMUFFIN

<font color=blue>Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood blue man </font color=blue> :smile:
Related resources
April 27, 2001 1:20:49 AM

Interesting. But the P4 will be a dead product once Northwood comes out. Are you saying the P4 will hit 10GHZ this year?

<font color=blue>This is a Forum, not a playground. Treat it with Respect.</font color=blue>
April 27, 2001 1:37:49 AM

Foster is still considered to be a P4... albeit a modified (improved) version... kinda like AMD's Athlon Classic vs. T-Bird. I only hope that the FPU is a lot more powerful.

--Fltsimbuff
April 27, 2001 3:03:37 AM

P4 a dead product? Whatever are you talking about? When we say "P4" we're talking about the design of the CPU, not any specific model of it. We'll be using the P4 design for years to come.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2001 3:40:34 AM

Uhhh jlbigguy....Northwood is the P4....jesus
April 27, 2001 9:02:55 AM

how many zeros does 10 GHz have?
realistically, P4 wont go till 10G, but P5 or P6 will, surely...

core upgrades are ok, but basically p4 does not have the potential to reach 10G, i guess it would retire at around 3.5 - 4 GHz and give way to P5s, or may be Itanium and its decendents if 64 bits do take over.

look at intel history - a new processor every 3 years.

<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>
April 27, 2001 9:15:21 AM

The P4 is designed to scale beyond 10GHz, and that's what it will do. If you haven't, please read the URL I supplied. Given the fact that we will see 2GHz in July, and given Moore's law, a 10GHz P4 should be available in about 3.5 - 4.0 years.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
April 27, 2001 9:19:15 AM

10GHz May be a lot of zeroes but you will find that it is not too far away as far as performance scaling goes. The performance roughly doubles every 18 months or so (faster now but let's take this as a guide).

We are at 1.7GHz now double it to 3.4GHz in about 18 months and again to 6.8GHz 18 months after that. Basically in 3 years we will reach ~7GHz. New CPUs come along about every 5 years or so 10GHz is a real possibility. In fact we may have to force the next CPU generation (much like P4 was forced) to get more GHz.

L
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2001 11:00:37 AM

If AMD said that the Athlon could go 10 ghz we would here nothing from yer monkey mouths now would we? Keep it down its hard to be evil with monkey chatter all the time=)

SPUDMUFFIN

<font color=red>Being Evil Is Good. Cause I Can Be A Prick And Get Away With It.</font color=red> :lol: 
April 27, 2001 12:12:50 PM

The P4 is a dead product, just as the Athlon classic is a dead product. Will Northwood require a new socket? New motherboard? Where is the "room to grow" (AMDMeltDown) for the current P4 user?

If the Northwood is an improved P4 (perhaps what the P4 should have been if Intel didn't rush to market) it will be significantly different then today's P4, and incompatible (hardware wise) as well.

Todays P4 sounds like a dead product to me.

<font color=blue>This is a Forum, not a playground. Treat it with Respect.</font color=blue>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2001 1:22:15 PM

AMD will achieve the same speeds as Intel.It's anyone's guess as to who will be faster to come out with the 10GHZ...
Isn't the latest trend showing AMD leading and coming out with each new cpu faster? (Except for the P4 1.7GHZ now that is...)
All I know is that there seems to be a lot more interest in P4s now that Intel is changing over to DDR-support from Rambus. Rambus is a dead place, that'll teach Intel for going against the entire memory market-or not...Seems to me they've made this mistake in the past as well.
April 27, 2001 3:43:01 PM

Okay, here's the thing. Sure, the P4 (Northwood, as the current incarnation of the P4 was DOA) might be able to scale up to 10GHz, but you have to remember, that current processing techniques don't allow for a die that small to be created. In order to do that, EUV has to be used, and while it was recently announced that the first prototype is built, it will be at least a few years before it is converted and used for fab plants. Yes, I understand that Moore's Law says this and Moore's Law says that, but you have to understand that it is really an average, and there will be times that it will go faster or slower than doubling every 18 months. In fact, Moore's Law probably would have been refuted if not for upstart AMD coming into the scene, providing much needed competition to Intel. Therefore, the P4 that hits 10GHz will most likely be as identical to the Northwood as a boy and a girl. Hey, they're the same species and can work together, but look, different parts! But seriously, it would, in my mind, be corporate suicide to try to stretch out a core for 5 years, like the Northwood would have to be in order to reach 10GHz. I mean, the P3 lasted, what, 2, maybe 3 years? To take the P4 out to 2006, when the makers of EUV expect the first 10GHz chip to be available, is kinda far-fetched. Plus, there might be some breakthrough in CPU logic by then that requires a reworking of CPU architecure.
The only reason why I can see Intel holding onto the P4 as long as that is that they wish to try to force people, mostly businesses, to build a machine that uses a dual mobo that has both a 32 and 64-bit processor. I mean, would you, as a consumer, really want to completely drop all your 32-bit apps, which work just fine, just so that you can run the one or two 64-bit app that you just got? I mean, it's another marketing move from Intel, if that is the case, and the P4 may have been designed specifically to run with a 64-bit processor no problem. Maybe that is why they ridicule AMD for making the Hammer, which has both 32 and 64-bit compatibility, they see it as a waste of money and a way to lose profit. So yeah, P4 may reach 10GHz, and that might be a plan, but it could be a conspiricy to squeeze a little more cash out of the consumers, or it just might be that they really expect the 32-bit apps to die off quickly after the first intro of 64-bit apps. But I really don't think that I would dump my 32-bit apps. I mean, I still use games and programs that were made to run with a Pentium 100... and I'm gonna run them on a 1.2 T-bird. Works for me, and I'm sure a lot of other people would not want to give up their old apps that they've grown to love and know.

Oh yeah, here's a link to EUV news:
<A HREF="http:// http://www.tomshardware.com/technews/technews-20010412.... " target="_new">http:// http://www.tomshardware.com/technews/technews-20010412.... </A>

-SammyBoy

Without Evil, there can be no Good. Therefore, without an Intel, there can be no AMD.
April 27, 2001 5:47:08 PM

We're not talking talking about the same P4 as is out right now. There will be core upgrades, etc. Not a very big deal if you ask me.

---------
I am the first and only one with a 16MB GeForce2 GTS graphics card! :smile:
April 27, 2001 6:02:10 PM

double speed in 18 months... true till now...

but how long? do you always pull the progress graph in a straight line? there has to saturation somewhere.
1.7GHz now
3.4GHz in about 18 months
again to 6.8GHz 18 months after that.
3 years we will reach ~7GHz
and in 4 and half years - 15 GHz
and in 6 years - 30 GHz
and in 9 years - 120 GHz

be realistic guys... silicon cannot work this fast
there are other alternatives like GaAs (Gallium Arsenide) that might go to that speed, but as current silicon tech stands i dont think it wil go much beyond 5~10 GHz, that too in such a short period.

there will be saturation and after some point Moore's Law will not hold true anymore

and we dont know just as yet where this point is...


<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2001 6:03:06 PM

You guys are forgetting that the P6 core includes the Pentium Pro, Pentium II, Celeron, Celeron A, Pentium III and Celeron II's. Again all those cpu's use the same basic P6 core. That's alot of mileage from a core design. So when Intel says the P4 will scale up to 10 GHz during its lifetime they are really implying that the P7 CORE will reach those speeds when infact the actual cpu features could be very different from what the P4 is today. Hope this made sense to you guys.. if not.. oh well, i tried.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2001 6:03:44 PM

Sounds very plausible. The Pentium Pro archatecure (albeit in various packages, first with SSE bolted on, some with on-die cache and some without!) has lasted from 150MHz to 1000MHz, a factor of 6.67. So if we consider the first 'serious' P4 as a 2.0GHz Northwood, the same factor produces over 10GHz. Although things are obviously more complicated than this, it's still an indicator.

The 10GHz chips will require a new type of etching, however, and how long this takes to perfect is another question. Either than or we'll be stuck with huge dies and massive cooling, a prospect I do not relish!


~ The First Formally Rehabilitated AMD Lemming ~<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Verteron on 04/27/01 07:05 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2001 6:50:07 PM

<<and in 9 years - 120 GHz
be realistic guys... silicon cannot work this fast>>

Back during the Pentium 100 days Im sure people like you said the same thing about hitting 1.2GHz (hands claspped over there ears shouting "Impossible! Impossible!" over and over.)
It's a good thing 9 years is long ways away.. it'll give you time to forget you made such a foolish comment.
April 27, 2001 7:06:14 PM

Actually I agree. The physical limitations of a silicon chip weren't even being grazed upon with the Pentium 100. 120GHz, is, well, <b>A LOT FREAKIN' CLOSER.</b>

---------
I am the first and only one with a 16MB GeForce2 GTS graphics card! :smile:
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2001 7:12:03 PM

Ahahaha the monkey men are mad they are chatting left and right like monkey's do on the discovery channel. Geeze calm down you AMD gimps need to know when youve been beaten and beaten bad. Aahahaha see you monkey's later.

SPUDMUFFIN

<font color=red>Being Evil Is Good. Cause I Can Be A Prick And Get Away With It.</font color=red> :lol: 
April 27, 2001 7:44:51 PM

Spud -


"A closed mouth gathers no foot." (anonymous)


beans
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2001 7:54:03 PM

Food is good. I really really like beans though "get in my belly".

SPUDMUFFIN

<font color=red>Being Evil Is Good. Cause I Can Be A Prick And Get Away With It.</font color=red> :lol: 
April 27, 2001 7:55:00 PM

Quote:
<<and in 9 years - 120 GHz
be realistic guys... silicon cannot work this fast>>

Back during the Pentium 100 days Im sure people like you said the same thing about hitting 1.2GHz (hands claspped over there ears shouting "Impossible! Impossible!" over and over.)
It's a good thing 9 years is long ways away.. it'll give you time to forget you made such a foolish comment.

Sadly, you have forgotten to take your own advice and read the link that I supplied with the comments on EUV, and you choose to flame those who make a realistic statement based on theory and fact. Embedded within all those links and articles are pharses that state, and I am paraphrasing, that silicon can only support etchings as small as 40 atoms across. Now while that is extremely small, I don't think that the 7th gen core will ever get that small (or an AMD silicon chip, for all you damn AMD haters), due to the fact that by that size, a flaw that might exist in a perfectly good CPU today would magnified millions of times, and probably cause some kind of instant CPU death. The quality control costs would be so extreme and the yeilds so low that the price of a silicon chip with 40 atom wide etching would be astronomical. Therefore, it is safe to assume that once EUV, or the other etching process thats in the pipe right now, begins to reach a stage of more waste than product, a different material has to be found. In fact, it is rumored that some experts think that the only thing better than silicon chips would be biochips, but hey, that's getting to the extreme part of technology. And my other comment, on how the P6 core lasted from the Pentium Pro to Pentium 3, is that there have been relativly few advancements in CPU logic, and now some of the really old ones that were dismissed years ago are coming back by force. I point you to this link and implore you to read it before you make another attack, as all it does is undermine your credibility.
<A HREF="http:// http://www.tomshardware.com/technews/technews-20010422.... " target="_new">http:// http://www.tomshardware.com/technews/technews-20010422.... </A>

In closing, I'd just like to say to I enjoy having debates and discussing issues with others, as long as there is an attempt at finding sources to back up the "facts" and a refrain from the "Intel Rules, AMD sucks" and vice versa BS that I see way too much on these boards. I understand that everyone has their chip of choice, but to belittle people because of that is flat out wrong and immature, and again, only undermines your own credibility, as well as irritating others who wish to learn from these boards. I hope that you people know who you are, because it seems to me that everyone else does, and it is in your best interest to stop the brand bashing and focus on the issue at hand. This goes for both the Intel and AMD "lemmings"

-SammyBoy

Without Evil, there can be no Good. Therefore, without an Intel, there can be no AMD.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2001 8:36:10 PM

I remember reading recently that Intel announced that they discovered a major breakthrough in CPU manufacturing process technology which, if memory serves me correctly, would allow them to keep up with Moore's law for at least the next ten years. Im sorry, but I dont have a link to back this up right now.. but i will try to find it. When I do you'll see that reaching 100+ GHz in 10 yrs is not as unrealistic as you may think.
April 27, 2001 8:56:59 PM

http://www.intc.com/pressroom/archive/releases/cn121100...

"Intel Corporation researchers have achieved a significant breakthrough by building the world's smallest and fastest CMOS transistor. This breakthrough will allow Intel within the next five to 10 years to build microprocessors containing more than 400 million transistors, running at 10 gigahertz (10 billion cycles per second) and operating at less than one volt."

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
April 27, 2001 11:50:52 PM

would you really want a 10ghz processor based on 7th generattion processing? hell we might be seeing the first consumer quantum computers by the time a 10 ghz processor comes out. and then theres clockless computing. 7th generation wont last long enough to see 10ghz, nor would anyone want it too. because if youve noticed, speed increases are beginning to have diminishing returns.

<A HREF="http://synthetic.bsd-fan.com/pika.swf" target="_new">Hyakugojyuuichi!!</A>
April 27, 2001 11:54:01 PM

"speed increases are beginning to have diminishing returns"

On the old P3 and Athlon cores yes. This is why a paradigm shift to a whole new core was in order. 10GHz processors based on this same P4 core will be available in about 3.0 - 3.5 years. This follows Moore's law.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
April 28, 2001 12:13:52 AM

first of all did you read my entire post? do you know what a 7th generation processor is?
also i took every single benchmark (except memory performance) from toms last review of the the p4 1.7ghz and compared them to the 1.5 ghz values in the same tests. While the 1.7 is 13.3% faster on paper, the average speed increases on the benchmarks was only 7.9%. thats barely more than half the return in speed increase. the althlon 1.2ghz vs. 1.3ghz fared much better. with only an 8.3% increase the average speed increase was 7.1%, much much closer to its paper speed. How do you explain these results away? If youd like I will repeat the process for 1.4->1.5 and 1.3->1.5, maybe that will make you realize what "diminishing returns" really are.

<A HREF="http://synthetic.bsd-fan.com/pika.swf" target="_new">Hyakugojyuuichi!!</A>
April 28, 2001 12:23:25 AM

That has nothing to do with diminishing returns. You are comparing two different processors that have a different number of average instructions per clock. It's well known that the P4 does not do as much in one clock as a P3 or Athlon does. However, total performance is measured in clockspeed multiplied by 'average instructions per clock', not clockspeed alone. Equating clockspeed to performance is a complete misnomer. I might as well design a 1Hz CPU that has one clock per second. I can fit an awful lot of instructions in that one clock, can't I? I could completely overwhelm any current processor on a clock per clock comparison.

As far as benchmarks go, I'd wait until software that has been optimized for the P4 comes out before trusting them. Currently they hold no credibility.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
April 28, 2001 4:17:43 AM

i was comparing two p4 processors to each other. are you saying that the p4 1.7ghz and the p4 1.5ghz perform different number of instructions per clock? wouldnt that make the p4 1.7ghz processor much more than 13.3% faster than the 1.5? it seems you are trying to play word games here to cover your ass, but it aint workin. the fact remains the same: higher clocked 7th gen processors are starting to show diminishing returns. next gen processors are coming out next year, and another generation will more than likely pass before the p4 hits 10ghz. so would you want a 10ghz 7gen processor or a 10ghz 9gen processor? its like asking if you want a 1ghz pentium or a 1ghz pentium3, the difference is obvious.

<A HREF="http://synthetic.bsd-fan.com/pika.swf" target="_new">Hyakugojyuuichi!!</A>
April 28, 2001 5:37:41 AM

Actually the difference is more like comparing the Pentium Pro with the Pentium 3. They use the same basic core. That's what will be happening with the new Pentium 4 core. It will scale all the way to 10GHz without much difficulty. There will probably be new 'generations' of processors using said core though.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
April 28, 2001 8:35:13 AM

<font color=purple> "Geeze calm down you AMD gimps need to know when youve been beaten and beaten bad. "</font color=purple>

What was the memory bandwith on the p4 again? LOL not only is the p4 getting its but kicked in the desktop arena lookout intel they are going to have AMD laptops that whoopya too!
<font color=red>
Sources with knowledge of the new chip claim it will have the industry's highest mobile processor clock rate and a 4.2Gbit/s memory speed, exceeding even the fastest desktop PC on the market today.

Details of Palomino leaked to EBN describe a chip with a clock rate of 1.3 to 1.4GHz, supported by double-channel PC2100 memory modules with 4.2Gbit/s data rates. </font color=red>

That would be the palomino Spud, this quarter! Dual channel DDR in a laptop.

Do you know the muffing man, the muffin man,.............



A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Ncogneto on 04/28/01 04:42 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 28, 2001 10:27:35 AM

silicon has its limits, and P4 architechture however "scalable" cannot reach 10 GHz, at least in the silicon era as the only one we know of now.

remember a few years ago physical limitations of copper on a PCB were realised and the system bus stuck at 66~133 MHz and CPUs started running faster internally on some multiple of the system bus. similarly, limitations of silicon are being reached, it would be replaced by some other material.

not that we wont see and mutli-GHz machines in recent future, i dont think they would be P4. newer material will need a new architechture that might be named as P5 or higher.

now, is 400 MHz bus of P4 really 400 MHz, its Quad-pumped Dual channel RDRAM 100 MHz bus that is *scaled* to 400 MHz by some innovative techniques. similarly, future processors may have more than one processor units inside that will perform parallely, a sort of multiprocessing withn a single chip - and that will scale its performance, say quad-unit P4 each running at 2 GHz having 400 MHz memory bandwidth could be labelled as 8 GHz processor having 1600 MHz memory bandwidth!!!

the VLIW (Very Large Instruction Word) processing is not far away from this...

<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 28, 2001 7:38:43 PM

I do know the muffin man why???

SPUDMUFFIN

<font color=red>Being Evil Is Good. Cause I Can Be A Prick And Get Away With It.</font color=red> :lol: 
April 28, 2001 8:15:49 PM

Girish...well done. I knew it would take someone from outside of the US to raise some real points. 10Ghz will not be reached by squeezing more juice out of the P4, a single chip (3 * 3.33Ghz) P4 will effectively give 10Ghz much cheaper and earlier (And will make the marketing guys happy). AMD will be stacking chips once they get to 0.13micron, thats why they built Dresden the way they did.

The CPU game is changing, its called 64bit for massive scale and parallel processing for power. There aren't many applications looking forward that will run noticably better on a 10Ghz than 2 * 5Ghz.

Kiwi in the UK
April 29, 2001 4:41:29 AM

Quote:
Girish...well done. I knew it would take someone from outside of the US to raise some real points

actually that point was already raised much earlier.

<A HREF="http://www.512productions.com/lobstermagnet/" target="_new">Hyakugojyuuichi!!</A>
April 29, 2001 6:18:46 AM

Well wasnt the Pentium 60 the best back in 1993. So accordingly then the Pentium 240 should have been out in 96 and the 960 in 99. So in 2002 we should have 3840 chips. That is if the law is exact. (User is bored)

Somebody call Guinness. I'm about to go zero to drunk in <b>twenty dollars!</b>
April 29, 2001 8:25:00 AM

There is an article for anyone who might be interested.
http://www.ibm.com/news/2001/04/27.phtml

<b>IBM scientists have developed a breakthrough transistor technology that could enable production of a new class of smaller, faster and lower power computer chips than currently possible with silicon.
The researchers built the world's first array of transistors out of carbon nanotubes -- tiny cylinders of carbon atoms that measure as small as 10 atoms across and are 500 times smaller than today's silicon-based transistors. The breakthrough is a new batch process for forming large numbers of nanotube transistors
</b>
April 29, 2001 9:24:39 AM

a foster will be a P4 in the same way that a P1 60Mhz is the same as a P3 1000Mhz

where did all my money go, ahh... [-peep-], forgot that i lived in london
April 29, 2001 2:55:23 PM

well, the technology is still in the labs and it will take a while for it to mature, and be mainstream.
meanwhile, processors have to bear with the current silicon technology that hsa already almost at its end.

now processors will NOT increase in MHz as much, but WILL increase in performance that better MHz would deliver, that newer techniques should be developed to get more out of same MHz.

after a while, these carbon nanotubes may takeover, or who knows optical transistors may take over and processors may see TeraHertz speed.

But is P4 architecture suitable for it...?

too bad you purchased a silicon based mobo right away and you cant upgrade your processor to carbon :-(
... thats at least 10 years away pal!

girish

<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>
April 29, 2001 3:14:11 PM

Could I just add that Moore's Law states nothing about speed. What it states is "Every 18 months, the number of <b> transistors </b> on a processor will double." The number of transistors is not the only thing that affects the MHz/GHz of a processor. Look at the GeForce3. It has 50 million or so transistors. The Kyro2 has 15 million, and it is not two-thirds slower than the GeForce3. In fact, in some cases, it runs at almost 90% of the GeForce3. The nanotube technology is what IBM and others have been trying to get figured out so that they can squeeze more and more transistors onto a chip. Now that it can be done in lab, and results in good yields, it will be at least five years before it is out in the fab plants, just like EUV. The foster core may hit 10GHz someday, but it will be a cold day in hell if it is the P4 that does it. And hell, I say silicon chips in general are dead. Bring on the bioware!

-SammyBoy

Without Evil, there can be no Good. Therefore, without an Intel, there can be no AMD.
April 29, 2001 6:09:28 PM

well, i agree to almost all of it...
but every advancement in technology has its implications as well. doubling the number of transistors not only means smaller chips, but lower power consumption and other physical effects like inductance and capacitance as well, and thereby ability to produce faster chips.. how fast, its just not a measure of MHz, but also the organisational improvements that smaller circuits allow to pack into the same area.

inclusion of cache, and the L2 cache on the chip itself allowed to increase the performance, the barrel shifter introduced in the 386 allowed multi-bit shift operations to be done in single cycle, increasing the number of pipes in the superscaler pentium which were actually two independent execution units almost doubled the performance at the same MHz as that of the 486.

this, i guess, could be the real meaning of Moore's law. and it should not apply to just silicon, newer processors made with newer materials, newer techniques and newer architechtures might as well continue to obey this legendary law.

girish

<font color=blue>die-hard fans don't have heat-sinks!</font color=blue>
April 29, 2001 7:36:46 PM

http://www.intc.com/pressroom/archive/releases/cn121100...

"Intel Corporation researchers have achieved a significant breakthrough by building the world's smallest and fastest CMOS transistor. This breakthrough will allow Intel within the next five to 10 years to build microprocessors containing more than 400 million transistors, running at 10 gigahertz (10 billion cycles per second) and operating at less than one volt."

With this technology we will see the P4 core scale upwards of 10GHz. After that, it's anybody's guess where we go.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 29, 2001 7:42:48 PM

That is incredible truly incredible. Tell you one thing Intel is on the ball this time. Two thumbs up from me maybe the monkey's will too.

SPUDMUFFIN

<font color=red>Being Evil Is Good. Cause I Can Be A Prick And Get Away With It.</font color=red> :lol: 
April 30, 2001 12:04:08 AM

where in that article does it say the P4 will go to 10ghz? sure they have the technology to go that high, but i cant see it happening without a heavily modified P4 if you could still call it that. Do you know how hot a P4 core would be running at 10ghz? Do you even consider this kind of stuff before posting? Do you know how a processor is built and how it functions? Jesus man, with every post you sound even more stupid than before. Quit trying to sound technical because you obviously arent.

<A HREF="http://www.512productions.com/lobstermagnet/" target="_new">Hyakugojyuuichi!!</A>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
April 30, 2001 12:36:45 AM

IBM is also working on photon switchs for cpu's. Almost everyone is working on it but IBM seems to be closest to the goal, products 3 to 5 years from now.

Anim88tor
April 30, 2001 12:37:51 AM

"where in that article does it say the P4 will go to 10ghz? sure they have the technology to go that high, but i cant see it happening without a heavily modified P4 if you could still call it that. Do you know how hot a P4 core would be running at 10ghz? Do you even consider this kind of stuff before posting? Do you know how a processor is built and how it functions? Jesus man, with every post you sound even more stupid than before. Quit trying to sound technical because you obviously arent."

Wow, you're easily angered. Take a deep breath. Might I suggest an anger management course?

If you'd take a moment to look at the URL I pasted in the very first message of this thread, you'd see the reference where it is stated that the P4 core will go beyond 10GHz. I never make up anything I write. Before you start making personal attacks against those you know nothing about, it would be best to check your sources. (Not that having sources that contradict someone's argument is any reason to attack them personally. You should always attack the argument, not the person. I'm just pointing out that you have no sources anyway, and lack any kind of credibility here.)

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
April 30, 2001 2:50:15 AM

"Intel Corporation researchers have achieved a significant breakthrough by building the world's smallest and fastest CMOS transistor. This breakthrough will allow Intel within the next five to 10 years to build microprocessors containing more than 400 million transistors, running at 10 gigahertz (10 billion cycles per second) and operating at less than one volt."

With this technology we will see the P4 core scale upwards of 10GHz. After that, it's anybody's guess where we go."

Good article. however nowhere does it mention that that technology would be implemented in the core of the p4, only that processors up to ten gig would be obtainable in 5 to ten years. Now, by using moore's law that you like to use lets see. Assuming that we will be at 2 gig in a couple of months.......

in two months........2 gig
18 months....4 gig
36 months....8 gig
54 months....16 gig
54 months/12 = 4.5 years

Point being Moore's law is going to no longer be effective soon.

Now what is your perspective on the belief that others in this thread seem to think that there motherboard may actually be usable all the way up to ten gig? And what is intels plan for upgrading the pci ide bus's? What have they got to bring to the table in the lines of hypertransport tech ( AMD) Which I may add is soon to be used in the x-box and will thus most likely be very well supported by M$.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
!