News Intel launches 45nm processor

And I almost thought you didnt like AMD, but you hate all fanboys.


If Intel wants to move ahead in performance they shoud focous on where the bottlenecks are, NOT on clockspeed. I think they saw the error in their ways and are scrambling around to fix it. They can move to smaller cores but AMD has them beat in the architecture of the chips. Even on the 100+nm cores clock for clock AMD still runs cooler cheaper and faster, my s754 3700 pwn'n my friends 3.4 ghz p4 with a 1 ghz clock diff (and mine dosent sound like a leafblower).

If intel can get their problems sorted out I think AMD will have some competition when it comes to real world prerformance.

 

the smallest particle is an atom, so you can't go any smaller than that without findi

abit off the topic but ...."the smallest particle is an atom"...that does not seem to be true nowdays....if you split a atom you release energy, but you have still split something into smaller pieces, so those smaller pieces would then be smallest particles.

 

Well, yeah. There are a whole variety of subatomic particles - take your pick:

Protons, neutrons, photons, W bosons, Z bosons, gluons, leptons (many types of these), quarks, Higgs bosons (existence of these is unconfirmed) and a plethora of others.

 

To be perfectly Honest ....Im loyal user of certain products ...BUT.. as long as the PC does not blown up in my face or anybodys else than I will be happy to use their products ...as long as I don't fall a sleep waiting for the PC to its thing...Im happy...& Safe.

Also as someone ealier mentioned, the current trend is moving towards silent pc's and we are all aware of Global Warming Etc etc, so soon it will be power consumtion which will be the next trend...I hope.....and it is clear that Intel is moving in that directions, make smaller cpu that produce less heat, and use less power, But AMD desktop cpu produce less heat than then Pentuims, so as long as these to rivals fight it out to be the faster, smaller cpu manufacturer, the better for me and you.

 

nice one hitmsan012, im stumped.....kudos to you anway.

 

You'll be pleased to know that it is - with new process shrinks and more efficient architectures, both Intel and AMD are concentrating on getting more performance per watt. Indeed, Intel have even made it one of their primary project goals for the next-generation architecture. I hope that soon, the idea of computing with loud fans and big heatsinks will be a distant memory

N.B. HellBoy: Please use the edit button instead of double/triple posting in the future. Thanks.

 

Sorry Hitman, but i won't do that.

 

Any way you put it, ultimately, theres still a long way to go before we're talking about molecular transisters. The process size refers to the average size of a transister; a 90nm transister for example has components as small as 22nm IIRC; they are complicated little things.

As far as technology and production goes, Intel, by and large, has far more fabrication capacity and production experience than AMD does; they put out a ludicrous amount of chips every month from their many facilities, and for the forseable future, that will not change.

Intel hadnt had a chance to work on improving performance since Prescott came out; it was all about clock speed and marketing then. With conroe, they have a chance to make a high performance per clock cycle processor-however, they are still limited by the front side bus inhereted from netburst; once their clock speeds increase, this limitation will fade away a bit, and AMD's processors, which wont be getting more than a clock speed boost and RAM feed increase from the AM2 transission in the known roadmaps, will start to have real competition.

 

did you mean power consumption bit-tech?

 

intel has to eliminate the fsb botleneck to get ahead the race against AMD.