Overclock.net › Forums › General Hardware › General Processor Discussions › 2011 and yet still 3Ghz is the limit?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2011 and yet still 3Ghz is the limit? - Page 7

post #61 of 75
Well, one of my first processors was an Intel P4 sole core running at 3.4Ghz stock. the real question here is, when will 3.5 or 4.0Ghz become the norm for the high end?

With all of the latest die shrinkage to go multi-core above X4, the Ghz for the X2 or X3 should go higher.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 64 x2 5000 Black 2.6Ghz OC 3.3Ghz GigaByte GA-MA78GM-S2H Full Radeon 780G HD 3200 4GB Corsair DDR2 6400C4 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
Seagate Barracuda 750GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache Windows 7 Pro x64 Corsair HX620W Meridian XClio High Tower I 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 64 x2 5000 Black 2.6Ghz OC 3.3Ghz GigaByte GA-MA78GM-S2H Full Radeon 780G HD 3200 4GB Corsair DDR2 6400C4 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
Seagate Barracuda 750GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache Windows 7 Pro x64 Corsair HX620W Meridian XClio High Tower I 
  hide details  
Reply
post #62 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by tallshortguy View Post
There's no way they have that tech. If they wanted to maximize profit they could release this "tech they already have" and command a virtual monopoly on the CPU market. You're saying that intel is many generations ahead of their own released tech and ready to launch this technology right now?
Not necessarily generations ahead, but i would highly doubt that they dont have prototypes that are 10 or even 15GHz, the problem is that it would not be feasible to mass produce them because the power needed to run and cool something like that would make no-one want to buy them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmaverick View Post
Well, one of my first processors was an Intel P4 sole core running at 3.4Ghz stock. the real question here is, when will 3.5 or 4.0Ghz become the norm for the high end?

With all of the latest die shrinkage to go multi-core above X4, the Ghz for the X2 or X3 should go higher.
Logic would say they should, and they definitely can, but these days its more about the cores rather than the speed of the cores, so the fewer core chips are seen as the low end models, and thus they don't usually build them to the same spec as the high end models.
post #63 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by reflex99 View Post
why? I don't think breast implants are that bad.....
The AMD machine
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1055t @ 3.8 GHZ Asus M4A79XTD EVO XFX Radeon 6850 1GB OCed G.Skill Ripsaw 16 GB (2x8GB) 1512 mhz @ 7-8-7-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
|WD Caviar Black 640GB|Seagate Barracudas 2TB X2| Lite-On Black 24X DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper 212+ Windows 7 Professional 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ 24" das Keyboard Model S Brown  OCZ Fatal1ty 550W PSU Coolermaster Storm Scout 
MouseMouse Pad
Razor DeathAdder Narlyfish 
  hide details  
Reply
The AMD machine
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X6 1055t @ 3.8 GHZ Asus M4A79XTD EVO XFX Radeon 6850 1GB OCed G.Skill Ripsaw 16 GB (2x8GB) 1512 mhz @ 7-8-7-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
|WD Caviar Black 640GB|Seagate Barracudas 2TB X2| Lite-On Black 24X DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper 212+ Windows 7 Professional 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
BenQ 24" das Keyboard Model S Brown  OCZ Fatal1ty 550W PSU Coolermaster Storm Scout 
MouseMouse Pad
Razor DeathAdder Narlyfish 
  hide details  
Reply
post #64 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by reflex99 View Post
why? I don't think breast implants are that bad.....
I don't like fake breasts.
post #65 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by tallshortguy View Post
There's no way they have that tech. If they wanted to maximize profit they could release this "tech they already have" and command a virtual monopoly on the CPU market. You're saying that intel is many generations ahead of their own released tech and ready to launch this technology right now?
no
what you see and can buy now is in reality already 1-3years old already

what intel has in their labs are prototypes as mentioned below that are either inefficient or not economical to produce in large scale yet
post #66 of 75
3 years is a very conservative number. I was reading somewhere that Sandy bridge had its first operational chip almost a decade ago.... Ivy was about 9 years. Its all about the bottom dollar and when they are done milking us dry with the current run of chips they toss out another series.
Nasty Girl
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5-760  Evga P55 FTW200 2 x Evga GTX 570 SC GSkill Eco 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Gkill Phoenix Pro SSD Samsung Spinpoint F3 LG Super-multi BDROM Cooler Master V8 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
3 Enermax Magmas + Scythe Kaze Master Controller Windows 7 Professional LG Flatron 2241 LED 22" Razer BWU 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair HX750 Antec Sonata Solo ||  Razer Deathadder Mionix Propus 360 
Audio
Creative X-Fi Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
Nasty Girl
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5-760  Evga P55 FTW200 2 x Evga GTX 570 SC GSkill Eco 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Gkill Phoenix Pro SSD Samsung Spinpoint F3 LG Super-multi BDROM Cooler Master V8 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
3 Enermax Magmas + Scythe Kaze Master Controller Windows 7 Professional LG Flatron 2241 LED 22" Razer BWU 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair HX750 Antec Sonata Solo ||  Razer Deathadder Mionix Propus 360 
Audio
Creative X-Fi Titanium 
  hide details  
Reply
post #67 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatfieco View Post
3 years is a very conservative number. I was reading somewhere that Sandy bridge had its first operational chip almost a decade ago.... Ivy was about 9 years. Its all about the bottom dollar and when they are done milking us dry with the current run of chips they toss out another series.
while youre right that 3 years is too low, its definitely not ten. Nehalem went into design stages near the end of the P4 era.
post #68 of 75
Very interesting thread!
But im still wondering was it better to have made multiple cores on a processor or had gone down the 1 core path?
from what i have read 1 core makes for better speed but multiple cores makes for better multi-tasking.
I wonder if amd and intel would have gone with 2 lines of processors, one with multi-core and the other with single-core and still have had a success with both >>.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II x4 960T ASUS M4A88GTD PRO AMD Radeon HD 6790 KHX1600C9D3/2gb 3x 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi 500gb 2 x 1 tb Ext Hard drives Liquid Cooling Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
LG Flatron W2043S/22 inch Thermaltake TR2-430 NZXT Guardian Red Headphones 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II x4 960T ASUS M4A88GTD PRO AMD Radeon HD 6790 KHX1600C9D3/2gb 3x 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi 500gb 2 x 1 tb Ext Hard drives Liquid Cooling Windows 7 Ultimate x64 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
LG Flatron W2043S/22 inch Thermaltake TR2-430 NZXT Guardian Red Headphones 
  hide details  
Reply
post #69 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rompf View Post
Very interesting thread!
But im still wondering was it better to have made multiple cores on a processor or had gone down the 1 core path?
from what i have read 1 core makes for better speed but multiple cores makes for better multi-tasking.
I wonder if amd and intel would have gone with 2 lines of processors, one with multi-core and the other with single-core and still have had a success with both >>.
I say no........
simple test
turn off your other cores, leave only 1 core active and overclock it as high as you can.......then tell us how it compares with having a full dual/tri/quad core config
post #70 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rompf View Post
Very interesting thread!
But im still wondering was it better to have made multiple cores on a processor or had gone down the 1 core path?
from what i have read 1 core makes for better speed but multiple cores makes for better multi-tasking.
I wonder if amd and intel would have gone with 2 lines of processors, one with multi-core and the other with single-core and still have had a success with both >>.
Intel was headed down the more GHz path with the netburst arch, does no one remember that and the huge performance AMD had at lower GHz?

Intel knew what the P4 was gonna be and PD, they used them while they had to as they had already switched gears and started design on conroe.

From there you can see how they molded the two archs together and took a bit of info from their competition.

Certain fundamentals to engineer what is needed will take 10+ years, but for most arch they for Intel at least seem to roll in about 3-5 year intervals.

And don't forget they have more then one arch they work on at a time here so even if one does flop like Netburst, at most it adds a couple years to introduce an arch they have looked at and now will perform better.

It doesn't all boil down to straight speed, but more efficiency of time used during clock cycles. The more operations an arch can do per a cycle the faster it will be even if at a slower speed/cycle rate.
Edited by rx7racer - 8/8/11 at 1:00am
D
(15 items)
 
The Sheep Skinner
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 Gigabyte Z170N-Gaming5 Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury Tri-X 3840 G.Skill TridentZ  
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
960 EVO 500GB EK SE 240mm, Magicool slim 240mm EK Supreme HF CU Gold EKFC-Fury X WB 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 10 Pro Acer XG270HU EVGA 750W  Evolv ITX 
MouseMouse Pad
Naos7000 Corsair MM600 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
C2D E8400 DFI LT P35 Radeon HD4890 OCZ 2GB 800MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500GB Asus multi DVD W7 U Samsung 2232BW+ 
PowerCase
Corsair HX520W CM 690 
  hide details  
Reply
D
(15 items)
 
The Sheep Skinner
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 Gigabyte Z170N-Gaming5 Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury Tri-X 3840 G.Skill TridentZ  
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
960 EVO 500GB EK SE 240mm, Magicool slim 240mm EK Supreme HF CU Gold EKFC-Fury X WB 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Win 10 Pro Acer XG270HU EVGA 750W  Evolv ITX 
MouseMouse Pad
Naos7000 Corsair MM600 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
C2D E8400 DFI LT P35 Radeon HD4890 OCZ 2GB 800MHz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500GB Asus multi DVD W7 U Samsung 2232BW+ 
PowerCase
Corsair HX520W CM 690 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Processor Discussions
Overclock.net › Forums › General Hardware › General Processor Discussions › 2011 and yet still 3Ghz is the limit?