dcsimg
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 25

Thread: Intel Redesign May Produce TeraHertz Chips

  1. #1

    Intel Redesign May Produce TeraHertz Chips

    WoW! That's amazing, quite some power!

  2. #2
    Member lildude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Cow County
    Posts
    381
    yes, it is quite impressive. too bad we have to wait 'til 2005 to see stuff like that.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    10

    64 Bit

    Why does the industry still refuse to go to a 64 bit architecture. If Intel and Microsoft would get together and decide to support 64 bit, that would increase capability, well by 2 to the 32. No matter how fast the chip, still takes two cycles to push a 64 bit number through (actually longer since the instruction itself takes up some bits as it passes through) Alpha, Sparc, and SGi have been doing this for a while. WHY DOES INTEL RESIST.
    Muad'Dib

  4. #4
    Member lildude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Cow County
    Posts
    381
    intel resists becuz they probly don't want to change their chip architechture. after years of having 32-bit chips, a change to 64 would be a BIG undertaking to say the least.
    Last edited by lildude; 11-26-2001 at 11:50 PM.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    136
    Intel is developing 64 bit chips with it's itanium chip. This chip is a complete departure from the old x86 architecture of it's current 32bit chips. The Itanium is curently selling for high-end servers and workstations now. There is even a 64bit version of windows xp avalible for it.

  6. #6
    Member lildude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Cow County
    Posts
    381
    true, true. i stand corrected. intel is producing 64-bit chips. however, when r they gonna make a chip that is 64-bit and aimed at mainstream desktop and laptop users?

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    36
    risc based processors still 0wn cisc based processors. however, at some point in time moore's law will not be correct simply b/c of the laws of physics.

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    West Yorkshire, England
    Posts
    4
    Itel rezistz because they cant make Itanium work. They got alpha so they had some engineers who could do the job right, and they still cant get it going - just ask Compaq about the server fcukup!

    Of course, they've had to develop this to match AMD's performance.... who needs 64bit when you can have dual XP1900's!

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    10

    I have dual Athlons!

    I have dual Athlon 1800 MPs, but I still would rather have Quad Alphas.... that would be cool.... but there just isn't the software support for it, once Intel goes 64 bit the industry will follow. Think if the graphics you could pump out with that!

    Quad Alphas....mmmmmm (Homer Simpson voice)

    As to Itanium, they have the binary translation software for all the MS apps since all Microsoft only writes in 64 for the OS and then pumps the apps through a 32bit binary translation program (Like Alpha did) IT KILLS PERFORMANCE. Until there is some coordination between the chip makers and the software writers, the move to 64 bit for everyday users will be far off....but I still hope.
    Muad'Dib

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    136
    don't forget AMD's hammer chip. Full 64bit preformance with blazing 32bit preformance and compatabilaty.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    ny
    Posts
    43
    This is correct zergboy......you took the words right out of my mouth

  12. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Dundee - Scotland
    Posts
    1
    I'm unsure - how a chip speed is measured:
    If each transistor can switch off 1 trillion times a second does that mean the chip will run at multi-terrahertz? All the transistors running at that speed?

    Or is the chip speed as fast as a single transistor?

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Aberdeen, Scotland
    Posts
    360
    And the average home user would use a Terrahertz processor, how?

    I seriously doubt half the home buyers that don't play games are even putting any real stress on a Gigahertz processor.

  14. #14
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Anna Maria Island, FL
    Posts
    10
    Bellbus, have you ever compressed video? I get tired waiting for a DVD to compress down to a DiVX file, and I have a 1GHz bumped up to 1.2GHz.

    Also remeber what Bill Gates said a few years back....

    "Who will ever need more than 640K RAM?"

  15. #15
    Member SEALTEAMTHREE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pensicola Naval Air Station, Florida
    Posts
    305
    All Intel is concerned with is clockspeed. If they could produce a 10 GHz chip that preformed like a 1 GHz PIII, they'd probably do it because they would advertise it as the fastest chip ever made. Back in the old days of the 386's, Intel was the exact opposite; they made CPU's that were slower in clock speed but had far more throughput than AMD or Cyrix's 386's. Today, the situation is reversed; Intel is chasing the clockspeed while AMD (their only seroius competition) continues to slam them by making chips that crunch more data per clock cycle through better chip architecture, and therefore they preform the same as an Intel chip that is 100's of MHz faster. Besides which, a THz CPU will produce more heat than a standard HSF will be able to remove, and watercooling will become a requirement. How many non-preformance users (regular people) will be willing to put water into an expensive electronic appliance?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •