Author: Matt Taylor
Date: 16:47:35 12/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 16, 2002 at 04:52:40, Jorge Pichard wrote: >On December 16, 2002 at 04:39:09, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>On December 16, 2002 at 04:01:37, Chris Taylor wrote: >> >>>How long before they put so many billions of these on a pin head and make a >>>super computer? >>> >>>Is this one of the *Things to come* >>> >>>How long will it be before a microscope is needed to fit a processor in a >>>computer? >>> >>>Merry Christmas >>> >>>Chris >> >> >>Probably by the time they manage to make a PDA capable of 10 Ghz! That could be >>five years from now. > >Intel could produce a microprocessor capable of 10 Ghz very soon, but they >simply won't because they have to profit gradually from 3Ghz to 4 Ghz to 5Ghz >etc... Simply the Murphy LAW is a profitable marketing strategy that has worked >gradually, if they make the mistake of producing a microprocessor capable of 10 >Ghz in the next 6 months they will lose a lot of money, by NOT squeezing our >pockets every six months as they have done for the last 20 years. > > >Pichard IBM has already built network processors capable of running at 10 GHz. Clock frequency means very little, though. Many RISC processors don't even hit 1 GHz, but they'll outperform any existing x86-based chip. However, as a matter of interest, Intel planned to take the Pentium 4 up to 5 GHz. Considering that they're at 3 GHz now -- yeah, they intend to milk consumers every step of the way. So does AMD, and so does every other chip-maker. It is quite expensive to design a chip because it takes a number of years, and they have to recover costs. There are other factors, too, though. To achieve higher frequencies, they need to shrink the die. That takes some work, and it also requires shifting production at their plants to make it economic. -Matt
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.