10GHz at under 1V by 2005 - The future of Intel’s manufacturing processes [2000]
1–10 of 180 posts
Re: 10GHz at under 1V by 2005 - The future of Intel’s manufacturing processes [2000]
#2So, what was the reason CPUs could not scale vertically (higher frequency)? Temperature? Stability?
Re: 10GHz at under 1V by 2005 - The future of Intel’s manufacturing processes [2000]
#3Well, where can I get mine?
Re: 10GHz at under 1V by 2005 - The future of Intel’s manufacturing processes [2000]
#4Well, this would be less then, wouldn't it?
Re: 10GHz at under 1V by 2005 - The future of Intel’s manufacturing processes [2000]
#5So, what was the reason CPUs could not scale vertically (higher frequency)? Temperature? Stability?
If I understand correctly, Intel CPUs around that time were super deeply pipelined so you could meet timing closure at such high frequencies. So yeah you can keep pushing the clock-speeds up and up but now a mispredicted branch really shoots you in the foot. Makes sense at the time because people associated clock speed directly with performance. Higher frequency more better. Intel kinda gave up on that at some point and started over with the core architecture design which has a lower clock speed but does more each pipeline stage.
Re: 10GHz at under 1V by 2005 - The future of Intel’s manufacturing processes [2000]
#6So, what was the reason CPUs could not scale vertically (higher frequency)? Temperature? Stability?
Not enough time for electrons to move. Photons - another story.
Re: 10GHz at under 1V by 2005 - The future of Intel’s manufacturing processes [2000]
#7> Realistically speaking, we should be able to see NetBurst based processors reach somewhere between 8 – 10GHz in the next five years before the architecture is replaced yet again
was a statement made by anandtech. Did Intel actually strive for those numbers?
Re: 10GHz at under 1V by 2005 - The future of Intel’s manufacturing processes [2000]
#8Re: 10GHz at under 1V by 2005 - The future of Intel’s manufacturing processes [2000]
#9So, what was the reason CPUs could not scale vertically (higher frequency)? Temperature? Stability?
> Temperature? Stability?
Yes. Notice how after it was clear that P4 was a dead end they went and dusted off their P3 mobile line that they had been making more power efficient the whole time?
Re: 10GHz at under 1V by 2005 - The future of Intel’s manufacturing processes [2000]
#10Well, this would be less then, wouldn't it?
[deleted]