Why don't AMD and Intel seem to get that the process is dead?

[CandymanCan]

Well you still catch my drift right.. cuss from what i see with fiber you run like in the thousands of GHZ.

Silicon is just to restricting. Its also at the end of its life i belive (when i say end i dont mean a few years from now i mean im thiking the long run), someone wrote and article about how silicon will be replaced soon. (when i say soon i say like many many years from now)

 

[deathBOB]

aHEM: Quantum computing, the true future of processors... but its at least 10-20 years away...

WHy compare a Prescott and not a Northwood to an A64? IMO, you shouldn't compare either, the A64 could easily be its own little class. YOu have the main processors (The Prescott or Northwood and the regular Athlon) and the super processors (The EE and FX)
The A64 seems like its own kinda class... I say this because it hasnt replaced the Athlon as the main chip...

I would like to see an A64 against a Dothan core...

 

[PunkRawk911]

Well you still catch my drift right.. cuss from what i see with fiber you run like in the thousands of GHZ.

Silicon is just to restricting. Its also at the end of its life i belive (when i say end i dont mean a few years from now i mean im thiking the long run), someone wrote and article about how silicon will be replaced soon. (when i say soon i say like many many years from now)

Well, I'm glad I at least got a good discussion going. I guess "dead" is too strong of a word, but struggling would be better.

By the way CandymanCan although the finite speed of light is very fast, the speed of electricity is slower. I think I remember reading in my physics book a few weeks ago that elctrons can only travel as fast as 1 foot/nanosecond, and that this was eventually going to be the limit on how many Mhz could be achieved.

 

[deathBOB]

Its not just INtel and AMD running into these problems...

The reason why Apple hasnt increased from 2ghz is IBM (makers of the Power5 chip) is that it requires a die shrink and is evidently difficult to do with that design...

 

[batboy]

I agee, let's keep on topic as best we can.

But, since I was asked about a couple thing... first off, that screenshot was in response to Candyman's ridiculous statement that Prescott's were junk. I was merely showing him that he was wrong. Since he freely admits his Barton can't come close to comparing with a Prescott and since he is convinced the Prescott is junk, that must mean his Barton is less than junk? Well, I know that's not true. I admire the Barton CPU, it's a good efficient processor that performs well for a low cost. Maybe we can compromise and agree that maybe the Prescott is not junk (even though I freely admit it needs improvement).

As for Petr's observation that I was running the vcore higher than I should... he's obsolutely correct. No way is that a good thing. I never claimed to be stable at that speed. That was merely a crazy max effort to achieve the highest O/C possible. However, I was stable at 3.8 gig as I mentioned in my earlier post (and at a more sane vcore too).

Anyway, let's get back on topic. Start another thread or PM me if you want to continue slamming the Prescott. I think I proved that Intel's imperfect 90nm CPU is neither junk nor dead. But, I admit a few bugs still need fixed.

 

[CandymanCan]

Going off of what Deathbob said, I dont see why u cant compare the the A64 with the presccot its in its class, A64 stands for Athlon 64, it is the Athlon xp's replacement like it or not.

The Athlon xp was more comparible to the Northwood, the A 64 is more comparible to the Prescott, just cuss its 64bit doesnt change a thing, all the tests are running in the 32bit process.

Anyway from what i see the A64 is better and slightly fatser then the Prescott. When overclocking that can be a diff story depending on the overclocks.

Batboy what kinda cooling were you using and what were youre temps if i may ask. 1 more thing to Batboy, no one started bashing the prescott Until you started Talking trash about how Intel is leaving AMD in the dust. Also you prooved nothing, you just shows ap ic of a unstable overclock. I can go to 2.7ghz on measly Desktop barton but it isnt stable so i dont bother with it.

 

[batboy]

Sure, we can compare the Prescott to the A64. Although I think it makes more sense to compare the A64 to the Northwood since they are both 130 nm processes. From what I've seen, my 3.8 gig Prescott O/C which was stable, beats an overclocked A64 in some test, gets beat in some tests, and in the rest it's a draw. Price is close to about the same.

What does that prove? I guess you will now make the claim that a mature 130nm A64 (or Intel Northwood for that matter) is equal to a brand new immature 90nm Prescott. Yep, there you have it. I might remind everyone that when the 130 nm cores were first introduced that they were something like 3X slower than what's available now.

My point is once again that the 90nm will continue to improve and mature. A short time down the road, there won't be 130nm CPU (Intel or AMD) that can compete with the new and improved 90nm CPUs.

As for cooling, all you need to do is look at my signature for the answer.

 

[deathBOB]

I have to agree with batboy... Comparing the newest unproven technology against the pinnacle (technologically) of the current generation (that has been refined over several years) and then saying the newest stuff sucks is just dumb...

But Prescott is still the wrong direction....

 

[Voltron]

I'd like to see them both move into dual core like you said before deathbob. Im glad Intel has taken this into mind, I just hope they act on it. I don't see the point for such outrages clock cycles, I hope 4 gig is the limit on the single core's.

 

[hUMANbEATbOX]

I hope 4 gig is the limit on the single core's.

you mean you wouldn't want a 5ghz p4?

 

[Gautam]

I think most of us would rather see a 3 GHz Conroe.

 

[hUMANbEATbOX]

i was thrilled the day my computer had more ghz than my cordless phone, but that's just me.

 

[Andy71600]

i was thrilled the day my computer had more ghz than my cordless phone, but that's just me.

I think that almost all of us shared in that excitement

 

[Falkentyne]

First off, the title of this thread is "Why don't AMD and Intel seem to get that the process is dead?" This is utter nonsense! Nothing could be farther from the truth from the Intel point of view. Let's look at facts: Intel has already released and is marketing CPUs that are 90nm. These Prescotts are working fine for the typical consumer at their rated speeds.

Yes, there are a few bugs and heat issues that are being worked out. Sure, us overclockers are disappointed that we can't overclock the snot out of them and hit 4 gig on a regular basis without suffering a meltdown, but us overclockers are also a small minority in the great scheme of things. Intel has a long history of improving on a design and a new Prescott stepping will be released in a few weeks that will address some of the problems.

The fact is Intel is way far ahead of AMD with the 90nm process. It was a smart move on Intel's part to be the first to 90nm. Better cooling will be required, but us overclockers know that can be accomplished. By the end of the year, Intel will have it all figured out while AMD flounders around and will get left behind in the dust.

The prescotts are *NOT* working "Fine" at their rated speeds.
Motherboard mosfets are blowing out left and right.

Not everyone in the world is an overclocker who has 20 degree case temp. The Joe sixpacks and John Smith's may have 90 degree room temps (not everyone can afford A/C), and closed cases, with case temps reaching 55 C, which doesn't help the mosfets one bit.

And what are they going to think when their computer doesn't turn on anymore? "oh no, the CPU must be dead..." so they RMA it back to Intel. New CPU arrives, doesn't work. Computer goes to a tech for $50/hour, finds the motherboard voltage regulators are blown. .....@_@

 

[{Epsilon}Stalin]

well ive done alot (as much as i can find) of reading on the prescott and the 90nm process....

basically all of the major points of the argument have been brought to attention already.
1) the volt leakage at 90nm
2) the early stage of the Prescott and its parallel to the early Northwood
3) the fact that yes, intel has had to rethink its CPU road maps since the unveiling of the Prescott

...there are more but these are the major arguments and points of converstation...

id like to say though that although the Prescott and its process are encountering some exotic and daunting trials that intel will most likely find bridges to these canyons, lets face it they have some of the brightest engineers and scientists working for them as do all of the CPU firms of the 21st century.
mankind has encountered much bigger and seeminly unpassable road blocks throughout history but lets face it;
we conquered fire
we conquered the wheel
we conquered the internal combustion engine
we are venturing into space
we are on the frontier of nano tech and quantum understanding of the universe
we will conquer the 90-65-43 nm processies

....after all we are humans, we laugh in the face of challenge, we thrive in the face of adversity....

and finally, i just bought a 3.0E Prescott and id hate for the Prescott to be on the road to obselescence before i even get in running (my mobo, MSI i865PE NEO2 PFISR, arrived DOA )

but in all honesty i think intel and AMD will survive and surpass the 90nm "wall"

 

[hrhrhrFOOT]

I like prescott, if only for the fact it has the 2.4a and 2.8a. 2.4a is known to be a helluva overclocker, and charlie over at xtremesystems has his 2.8a @ 4 gigs on air.

 

[{Epsilon}Stalin]

hey hrhrhrfoot,
can u re-reply.... i cant understand what u said

thanks

 

[JaY_III]

Wow so much prescott bashing....
Along with bashing intel and 90 nm...
I dont see how anyone can bash Intel's 90 nm process when they are the only ones that have made it work so far

 

[batboy]

The prescotts are *NOT* working "Fine" at their rated speeds.
Motherboard mosfets are blowing out left and right.

Quite an exaggeration. Mind sharing your source of info?

 

[OC Detective]

Hmm probably only 10% of the posts here relate to the original poster's question. Thanks to one person saying a cpu A is having more problems than cpu B everyone else piles in like a bar-room brawl!
A couple of thing to note - strained silicon and SOI are still in their infancy so hopefully when the respective companies iron out the issues and thus resolve the heat problems/leakage surrounding the process at 90 nanometres, which I am sure they will, then they be able to tackle the reduction to 65 nonometre and so forth. The shrink process is most definitely not dead (just look at the heat output for Dothans) but the fat lady is singing for the megahertz race.