Why Do Clock Speeds Go Up?

[Guest]

What causes successive generations of CPUs to run faster? I know better designs is one. What about the fabrication process? When it shrinks can't you naturally crank up clock speed since it uses less power and generates less heat?

 

[mpjesse]

Faster clock speeds are pretty much a direct result of die shrinkage and a smaller manufacturing process (such as .18 microns). The smaller the die- the less voltage it uses which results in higher clock speeds. You'll notice that there is ALWAYS a development process on shrinking dies (.13 microns has already been achieved by TMC)... Soon Intel and AMD will be at .13 microns. VIA makes a CPU that's manufactured at .15 microns. Currently, .13 is already possible so research is being done on .10. Get it?

One thing I forgot to mention- higher clock speeds are also a direct result of higher FSB speeds. For example, multiply 9 times a 100mhz FSB and you get 900mhz... multiply 9 times a 133mhz FSB and you get 1.2Ghz... FSB speed is very important in achieving high clock speeds.

-MP Jesse

"Signatures Still Suck"

 

[ajmcgarry]

The smallest process I know of currently being researched (besides nanotech stuff) is 0.07 by Sony and Toshiba.



<font color=blue>Little Miss Muffet was arachnaphobic</font color=blue>

 

[ajmcgarry]

The smallest process I know of currently being researched (besides nanotech stuff) is 0.07 by Sony and Toshiba.



<font color=blue>Keep your hands above the covers at all times!</font color=blue>

 

[mpjesse]

Yeah- i read that... Your talking about a micron process so small that you could probably reach somewhere around 50Ghz with it. .13 is supposed to yield up to 10Ghz... .10 even higher.

-MP Jesse

"Signatures Still Suck"

 

[stonerboy]

Another thing that influences the speed of a chip is the size of the pipeline. Longer pipelines allow for faster clock speeds. This is one reason why the P4 is able to be clocked so high. I believe it has 20 steps in its pipeline as opposed to I think 17 in the P3. (Someone correct me here if I am wrong). But the longer pipeline can also create more branch mispredictions.

"In three words I can sum up everything I've learned in life: It goes on." -Robert Frost

 

[Phelk]

~ The smallest process I know of currently being researched (besides nanotech stuff) is 0.07 by Sony and Toshiba. ~

We are coming very close to reaching the limit imposed by the size of an atom. I can't remember exactly what the limit is (I think 0.03micron), any chip designers around here?

<font color=blue> The Revolution starts here... as soon as I finish my coffee </font color=blue>

 

[Guest]

But then they'll just up the number of bits to 128, and then 256. Right now the most we have is 64 bits. The Geforce 3 is clocked at something like 380Mhz, but processes more information than a pentium 1000 can, all because it is 256 bit.

Megahertz are meaningless.

Aklein

It's raining outside, and my lawn has grown a foot overnight!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by aklein on 05/31/01 05:08 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[somerandomguy]

IBM has been working on some interesting stuff. Transistors one five-hundredth of the size of the .18 micron process, that are only ten atoms across. Have a look.

http://www.research.ibm.com/resources/news/20010425_Carbon_Nanotubes.shtml

"Ignorance is bliss, but I tend to get screwed over."

 

[Guest]

so do you think it is realistic that soon we will be back down to the sub-ghz machines, but that run at a 128, etc? Wouldn't that wreak havoc on current programs and switching them over? And how much more useful would a 256 processor runing at 1ghz be over a current Athlon running at 1ghz for doing simple addition and smaller computations? If the programs weren't written to perform more complicated operations the extra width would be lost, right?

anyway, im a dumbass

Old addage: "Users never prosper" ) Long live the tweakers

 

[killall]

why do processor manufacturers just not work on better instruction sets and cache and ram access instead of upping clock speed...

you do not strengthen the weak by weakening the strong

 

[dhlucke]

It's all about the Benjamins. The higher the clockspeed the more people buy that processor. That's at least true for the average consumer. Gamers and hardware freaks are an exception.

<font color=red>Amd or Intel? Who cares?? Not me...</font color=red>

 

[Phelk]

~ Transistors one five-hundredth of the size of the .18 micron process, that are only ten atoms across~

That doesn't quite seem right, after doing some research an atom is roughly 2nanometres wide, .18 microns is 180 nanometres. 10 atoms across measures 20nanometres so it is only 180/20 = 9 times smaller not 500.

So in theory if we are at 0.18u today we can at maximum (assuming we are not getting in quarks and the like) reduce the size 90 times. I know it doesn't work this way but 90 * a 1.33Ghz CPU is 120Ghz!

<font color=blue> The Revolution starts here... as soon as I finish my coffee </font color=blue>

 

[FatBurger]

What no Terahertz? Ah well, maybe we'll just have to liquid nitrogen cool and overclock 1000%

------------------------------
Apple? Macintosh? What are these strange words you speak?

 

[Guest]

Well why the hell would we want them to go down?

 

[Guest]

iam a pc user, so dont crucify me here. i own an athlon 1300 and love it, a pII 266 and love it(yes its plenty useful still). i have a mac quadra 650(asskickin machine for its time) and an apple 2 plus(good for nostalgia and learning economy of code, not much else). as for the lower clock and higher bits its called the G4 power pc, i believe it has a 128 bit datapath thus its "supercomputer on a desk" status. i dont own one and im not touting apple, i just wanted to add to the thread that it is being done(which most already know).