Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
151 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Two years from now, where do you see AMD processors being? What do you think the highest speed processor will be at stock? Do you think single core CPUs will be produced any more?

I think the highest speed CPU from AMD will be around 4 GHz, but dual-core (possibly triple or quadruple-core). As far as single cores go, I can't really see them sticking around too much longer. Multi-core is the wave of the future, and as soon as software starts catching up with hardware, single-core CPUs will disappear.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,872 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Zardokk

Two years from now, where do you see AMD processors being? What do you think the highest speed processor will be at stock? Do you think single core CPUs will be produced any more?

I think the highest speed CPU from AMD will be around 4 GHz, but dual-core (possibly triple or quadruple-core). As far as single cores go, I can't really see them sticking around too much longer. Multi-core is the wave of the future, and as soon as software starts catching up with hardware, single-core CPUs will disappear.


I see them being at 4 or maybe even 5Ghz as for the amount of cores im not to sure have to wait for that one. I think the Single Cores will be begining to Die out along with the older sockets
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
151 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I think we'll start seeing something beyond dual-core by the end of next year. I also think AMD will have dual cores pushing over 3 GHz each (or close to it) stock by the end of next year. By the end of 2k7, I can't see anything less than 4 GHz dual-cores, hopefully 4 GHz quad-cores
.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,422 Posts
I remember when we went from just reaching 1Ghz to get 2Ghz in a very short period of time. Now the processor speed is starting to level off, but other technologies are increasing speeds. Like 64bit processing, and 90nanometer tech. Those are the changes we will see in future processors.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,110 Posts
I read that intel will be releasing QUAD-CORE CPUS within a year, I bet AMD will take the same path.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,743 Posts
In the future I see Multi core CPUs becomeing more popular. But not in the way you guys see it. I think that the future will show several task specific cores that run at modest speeds at lower voltages. A single CPU that does it all does nto seem to fit the bill to me. If you have two CPUs why not code them for different tasks. Or at least code them to be better at different tasks. That way you can still multi task well. If they really want to they can move up to 4ghz CPUs but I dont see the need.
 

·
15 Year Club
Joined
·
2,322 Posts
About having task specific cores: That's why we have the GPU and soon the PPU alongside the CPU. I don't think they will make CPUs task specific, and I don't think they should because I think they would end up becoming OS specific (Windows Specific).

Dual core will phase out single core and become afordable for the mainstream within a year or so.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
151 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Quote:


Originally Posted by Cait Sith Cat

About having task specific cores: That's why we have the GPU and soon the PPU alongside the CPU. I don't think they will make CPUs task specific, and I don't think they should because I think they would end up becoming OS specific (Windows Specific).

Dual core will phase out single core and become afordable for the mainstream within a year or so.

Nice that you bring up PPUs. That's another thing I'm really interested in for the next few years. Having a whole other processor for physics...games would run incredibly fast. A CPU for major processing, a GPU for graphical tasks, and a PPU to handle physics. It would enable hundreds, possibly thousands of objects on screen at the same time. Two words: freakin' sweet!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
If they do the PPU right, we could see the gaming experience greatly improved. that is the only thing we really need faster computers for , right?? I can't even type as fast as a 33mHz can go. Rendering can be done with farm setups of slow computers... so the computer world really revolves around how fast we can game. Truth be told.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
897 Posts
Well, just look at Intel's path right now (haven't read too much AMD, Intel is breaking more news). First month of next year 65nm single cores. Needless to say, with that, 90nm might be gone in 2 years. Also, Intel finally has realized higher clock is not better, so they may drop back on some of their chips, going more AMD style. On the other hand, with 65nm, cores will run cooler, which will allow AMD and Intel to both have higher speeds on high end chips. Think of all the advances in the past few years, and compress them into one year. I think thats what '06 will be like, and who knows about '07. But something better be good, cus thats when I build gaming comp for college
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,049 Posts
quad cores at least
at least but the speeds gonna be limited by cooling
but water coolings gonna drop alot when its market gets huge
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
151 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
65nm would be pretty interesting, and possibly the only area where Intel has surpassed AMD. It looks like they're beating them to it. I think we're going to see multi-core processors a lot more over the next two years, and things getting continously smaller and a little bit faster. When I say smaller, I don't mean overall CPU size, just core size (possibliy CPU size also). I think we could see 4-core 45nm AMDs running at 4 GHz by late '07. I might be dreaming a little too much, but I think quad-core and 45nm will be available by the end of '07, at least to the high-end user.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,349 Posts
People, u r forgetting 9nm, not 90nm, 9nm carbon ytube transistors. 10ghz the very least. Dozens of cores too.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,280 Posts
I don't know how far it's going to go bt i reckon that they will try to improve the efficency of there CPU's, so instead of AMD doing 9 ops per cycle they'll try and get them to do 18 ops per cycle, i don't think that the clockspeed of the processor will bjust be another thing to consider when buying a processor.

Efficiency is the way to go though.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top