Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Intel Targeting 22nm Chips by 2011

Tags:
Last response: in News comments
Share
September 22, 2009 10:28:05 PM

Damn, and 32nm isn't even on the mainstream market for cpus
Score
1
September 22, 2009 10:39:12 PM

Intel is on a roll.
Score
8
Related resources
September 22, 2009 10:50:49 PM

Anyone know when we'll start seeing laptops based on the Intel processors that are being announced tomorrow? (Specifically, Core i7-820QM or Core i7-720QM)
Score
-1
September 22, 2009 10:58:17 PM

doofusofdeathAnyone know when we'll start seeing laptops based on the Intel processors that are being announced tomorrow? (Specifically, Core i7-820QM or Core i7-720QM)

^I'd say around Christmas or earlier.
Score
-1
Anonymous
September 22, 2009 11:00:07 PM

By 2011? The article says 2nd half 2011, so that would be by 2012, but we all know how that usually works out, so let's say "around 2012".
Score
8
September 22, 2009 11:01:40 PM

@shadow703793: Thanks. Just occurred to me that I should post this on the homepage's questions section, not in this thread.
Score
-1
September 22, 2009 11:14:21 PM

2012_or_gtfoBy 2011? The article says 2nd half 2011, so that would be by 2012, but we all know how that usually works out, so let's say "around 2012".

Eh? It says 2011 because it IS 2011. All of Intel's die shrinks on its new tick-tock model have been introduced in fall of an odd year. Penryn (2007), Westmere (2009) and Ivy Bridge (2011).
Score
2
September 22, 2009 11:18:21 PM

I WANT ONE!!!
Score
0
Anonymous
September 22, 2009 11:23:38 PM

zerapio: Read the headline, "by 2011" means sometime late 2010, when the article states the 2nd half of 2011. "By" indicates it will happen "before".
Score
0
September 22, 2009 11:35:59 PM

english_grammar_wizardryzerapio: Read the headline, "by 2011" means sometime late 2010, when the article states the 2nd half of 2011. "By" indicates it will happen "before".

Wow, you're serious. Here, read something: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/by
In this article the word 'by' is used as meaning "no later than" or no later than 2011. The year 2011 is not an instant so therefore the second half of 2011 is still considered as 2011.
Score
1
Anonymous
September 23, 2009 12:01:53 AM

zerapio: Way to twist things around to support your thesis. "By the end of 2011" or "Sometime in 2011" would support your argument, but he said "By 2011", so that means January 1, 2011 the **instant** that 2011 happens.

Compare, why would the wording:

"By the end of"

exist if

"By..."

Meant the same thing? "By the end of the day" or "By today". "By the end of the week", or "By this week". Since the date/time/year here are arbitrary and don't contribute a context, please explain to me that this is how you speak in normal life.
Score
-4
September 23, 2009 12:08:15 AM

Isn't Moore's law going to hit a massive hurdle at 16-18nm in roughly 2013, which would be the logical step after 22nm? I hear the die is too small for electricity to not to create damage. Any experts want to weigh in on this. I just have a vague recollection from a nanotechnology show I watched I the science channel about 9 months ago.
Score
1
September 23, 2009 12:20:30 AM

zerapiownagezerapio: Way to twist things around to support your thesis.

You: by 2011 = before 2011
Dictionary: by 2011 = no later than 2011

I can see how by your definition you think Marcus is wrong but the dictionary agrees with him. End of conversation.
Score
-3
September 23, 2009 12:32:10 AM

"If you're early, you're on-time
If you're on-time, you're late
If you're late, don't show up."
Score
1
Anonymous
September 23, 2009 1:00:46 AM

zerapio: No, you're injecting into the definition that 2011 is not an "instant" or an "event", but it is, you sound like Christian-folk referencing the Bible, then interpreting it to mean whatever you want(and then trying to declare the conversation over).
Score
-5
September 23, 2009 1:08:28 AM

so, does that mean 45MB of cache! :D 

i7 9xx has 700m transistors, 8meg of cache.
so in two years will have 4 times the transistors and 5 times the cache?

guess i'll upgrade then (if gpgpu hasn't completely destroyed any reason to have a powerful cpu, on the other hand these chips would be mighty awesome in larrabee too.)

tempelifeIsn't Moore's law going to hit a massive hurdle at 16-18nm in roughly 2013, which would be the logical step after 22nm? I hear the die is too small for electricity to not to create damage. Any experts want to weigh in on this. I just have a vague recollection from a nanotechnology show I watched I the science channel about 9 months ago.


Apparently there is an issue with quantum tunneling. I herd a year or so ago that someone had figured out away to reliably predict how small you can make it before you get quantum tunneling, so if they don't find away around that they may indeed hit a brick wall.

Score
-1
September 23, 2009 1:13:43 AM

Geez..

Whatever. The 45nm are still new and no rush to put 22nm out too fast. They are making memory chips, as usual. We won't be seeing any complex CPUs using 22nm for 2 years... which is about right.
Score
1
September 23, 2009 1:33:52 AM

"Big things are getting smaller." lol
Score
1
Anonymous
September 23, 2009 2:32:44 AM

This sounds just like HDDs. I remember a few years ago they saying that HDD manufacturers will hit a wall in the amount of data that could be crammed onto a platter, but yet they managed to find a way around it and 2TB drives are becoming affordable. The top R&D guys knew this was coming ages ago and I bet they are already working out ways around it.
Score
2
September 23, 2009 3:43:15 AM

but can it run crysis ???
Score
-9
September 23, 2009 4:28:36 AM

zerapioYou: by 2011 = before 2011Dictionary: by 2011 = no later than 2011I can see how by your definition you think Marcus is wrong but the dictionary agrees with him. End of conversation.


Webster's, huh? I just looked up "by" on dictionary.com and, after perusing the dozen definitions, came upon this gem:

6) not later than; at or before: "I usually finish work by five o'clock."

On Webster's, it's "no later than" example is "by 2pm"

So I'd say it's pretty conclusive that the dictionary states that by using "by" you mean "no later than the BEGINNING of said time period"

"by 2pm" or "by 5 o'clock" does NOT mean falling anywhere between 2 and 3pm or between 5 and 6"

SO, the article should have the headline, "Intel Targeting 22nm Chips by the end of 2011

And that means, Zerapio, you're an idiot.
Score
-5
September 23, 2009 5:04:19 AM

Well , looks liek they are going to hit a brick wall before I turn 25. goody. I get ot see the rise of computers , and then the halt of them.
Score
-1
September 23, 2009 6:55:25 AM

Gin FushichoWell , looks liek they are going to hit a brick wall before I turn 25. goody. I get ot see the rise of computers , and then the halt of them.


No, if they can't make it smaller it'll just have one of three things done. 1. The new CPU's do nothing other than do more work per cycle. 2. They go massively parallel - and this time, programs will have to be written to use as many cores as possible instead of hard coding them for two or three. 3. Actually switch from x86 to something new.

I suppose that multiple sockets are possible too. No matter what, until they figure a way to fix the problem they'll find a way to walk around it first. Like I wouldn't be surprised if they fixed the problem with parallel interfaces and arrival times of bits (PATA) and we switched back to parallel to use the (currently theoretical) speed of it instead of SATA.
Score
-1
September 23, 2009 7:02:49 AM

Hole shit...
They already made a few 22nms!?!?!

I wonder how much each 22nm cheap to date has cost to produce...
I wonder if they're functional (or have only a 1% or less yield).
Score
-2
September 23, 2009 12:17:56 PM

They are and have been researching other chemicals to use besides silicon in the manufacturing process. Silicon has a lot of resistance and a lot of waste. If they can make them with another material then they will be able to go much smaller. This is actually the reason they started using the high-K process.
Score
-1
September 23, 2009 1:38:39 PM

It won't be long before they start using artificially produced Diamonds to make everyday CPUs. Back in 2003 a Diamond CPU reached 81GHz, I haven't heard anything since then but trust me, Intel and AMD and IBM will be heavily investing R&D into Diamond CPUs for the future. But likely before we do Graphene will be a step along the way.

Incidentally, a single Carbon atom thickness transistor has already been made. That's a staggering 0.1nm, or 220 times thinner than 22nm.
OMG?!? WFT?!?
Score
0
September 23, 2009 2:20:25 PM

zerapioHey Krazynutz, since you know so much about grammar and I'm an idiot let me dedicate this to you: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou [...] mLwOu6ntkg

Ha ha...okay you got me on that one. I changed my sentence midway and didn't change my "it's" to "its". I originally ended it before "example" which would have been the correct usage. But, touché, nonetheless.

Back on topic though, yeah, I've heard of that diamond CPU as well. I'm sure before they hit a roadblock with CPU architecture they'll have an affordable alternative for silicon.
Score
-2
September 23, 2009 3:05:56 PM

krazynutzBack on topic though, yeah, I've heard of that diamond CPU as well.

About time too, I did wonder if had wandered into a forum called "Grammar Nazis" by mistake...
Score
2
September 23, 2009 4:29:06 PM

krazynutzHa ha...okay you got me on that one. I changed my sentence midway and didn't change my "it's" to "its". I originally ended it before "example" which would have been the correct usage. But, touché, nonetheless.

No worries man; it happens to everyone. BTW I'm not normally I'm not that big of an ass. I guess I was pissed off before posting. Peace!
Score
-2
September 23, 2009 4:32:24 PM

krazynutzWebster's, huh? I just looked up "by" on dictionary.com and, after perusing the dozen definitions, came upon this gem:6) not later than; at or before: "I usually finish work by five o'clock." On Webster's, it's "no later than" example is "by 2pm"So I'd say it's pretty conclusive that the dictionary states that by using "by" you mean "no later than the BEGINNING of said time period""by 2pm" or "by 5 o'clock" does NOT mean falling anywhere between 2 and 3pm or between 5 and 6"SO, the article should have the headline, "Intel Targeting 22nm Chips by the end of 2011And that means, Zerapio, you're an idiot.


You two are incredible. Here is how it works outside of the internets (you will find this out when you have a meaningful job): When you say "i will do X by Y" to your co workers, this means "sometime during Y I will have X done". When your boss tells you "you need to have X done by Y" it means "the earlier you have X done the more likely you are to keep your job".
Score
-2
September 23, 2009 5:18:08 PM

amd getting 6 core ready with same tech

intel getting new tech : +1 to intel on that :) 
Score
-1
September 23, 2009 6:29:24 PM

anamaniacHole shit...They already made a few 22nms!?!?!


Now that's a strange religion -- "the worship of feces." :D 
Score
-4
September 23, 2009 9:22:47 PM

joebob2000You two are incredible. Here is how it works outside of the internets (you will find this out when you have a meaningful job): When you say "i will do X by Y" to your co workers, this means "sometime during Y I will have X done". When your boss tells you "you need to have X done by Y" it means "the earlier you have X done the more likely you are to keep your job".

Are those the rules you just made up? Wow. I'm pretty sure the dictionary definition works both on the internet AND at meaningful jobs. Crazy I know. And thanks for calling me incredible. My fellow coworkers at my already-landed, meaningful job seem to think so. Cheers.
Score
-2
September 24, 2009 2:28:16 AM

... i didn't want to get dragged into an internet debate; i think most of us know how they usually go. But since i was dragged in by discriminitory generalizations ...

you sound like Christian-folk referencing the Bible, then interpreting it to mean whatever you want(and then trying to declare the conversation over).

My intention is not to start a religious discussion (though, if you have any questions you would like to discuss privately, i'm open), but just like any group containing billions of people, there are those who fit the accusation, and those who don't.

But more to the point of the story ... i can't believe i missed 2009 ... wait, it's not 2010 yet, but i just read it's not 2009 either ... how DOES that work??? Fyi, january 1, 2011 0:00:01 is not when 2011 ends.

And finally, the announcement and the article you read referencing the announcement both state:

Intel said that production chips using the 22nm process should be ready for the second half of 2011.

Interestingly enough, in that cut and paste, i don't even see the word "by".

gotta love internet arguements.

Just another one of those "Christian-folks" twisting the story to their liking,

Quikslyver
Score
-2
September 25, 2009 12:42:15 AM

Please excuse my lack of proof reading on the above post. Hopefully it was obvious that i had 2 quotation excerpts that i did not put in quotation marks. For some reason i am not seeing any way to edit my post (due to my own oversight i'm sure).

I am kind of excited for the prospect of how much this could improve performance, etc., but as others have pointed out, this is actually quite a way off before we will benefit from it ... in the meantime, Intel will profit hugely from their already almost obsolete, but the best that we can get processors. And we will pay dearly for each miniscule shade of increased performance.

/sigh, c'est la vie (probably didn't spell that right either).
Score
0
September 25, 2009 1:59:39 AM

Quikslyver - The argument was based on the headline - not the body text. Oh, and "c'est la vie" is spelled correctly :) 

And according to an English professor of 30 years, "'By 2011' means it will happen before or perhaps on Jan. 1, 2011. It does NOT mean it could happen anytime in 2011. Even Jan. 1 is debatable."

So :p 
Score
0
September 25, 2009 12:25:45 PM

You got it. On to the real matter at hand. Here's a more extensive story on the die shrink: Linky
Good article. A key paragraph on shrinking beyond 22nm is stated below:
"Intel is planning to use 193nm immersion lithography for critical layers, and double patterning for the rest. The company is unlikely to use EUV (Extreme UltraViolet) tools even for the 15nm process in 2013, but may consider them for use in the 11nm process that will be introduced in 2015."
Score
0
April 6, 2010 4:58:11 AM

Don't get surprised. In a decade, or maybe even sooner, based on Intel's progress, processors will be far faster, maybe even in the 10 gHz range. This is because of the carbon nanotubes, which will replace the limited supply of silicon. Here's the link.

Score
0
April 6, 2010 5:00:08 AM

Score
0
!