10-24-2002, 05:49 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
When Will Desktop Chips Hit 15 GHz?
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,106241,tk,dn102302X,00.asp
CPU speeds continue to skyrocket upward, but can you imagine a 15 GHz CPU? We'll need to continue to expand the speed of other components as well to keep up with that - AMDs HyperTransport technology is a step in the right direction, but we'll need to see a radical improvement in hard drive speed as well before we'll see the benefits of a CPU this fast.
"Users can expect to see the processing speed of Intel's desktop processors hit 15 GHz and that of wireless device and PDA processors hit 5 GHz by 2010, the chip maker's chief technology officer said in Tokyo on Wednesday. The 15-GHz desktop chip, some five times as fast as the company's soon-to-be-launched 3-GHz Pentium 4 chip, will pack one billion transistors, said Pat Gelsinger, vice president and chief technology officer of Intel as he delivered a keynote address to the company's Intel Developer Forum Japan conference in Tokyo."
The article goes on to talk about the challenges in getting higher speeds out of wireless and PDA CPUs:
"...In the wireless and PDA space, Gelsinger said, the company is expecting to see speeds rise from the current 400 MHz to 5 GHz over the same eight-year period of time..."Desktops today are [consuming power of] 75 to 100 watts and when you go to handheld devices you are typically operating at less than 1 watt," said Gelsinger. "Obviously, you are optimizing the design for different criteria. So today, if I was going to look at a StrongArm core or XScale core, could I create a 2-GHz or 3-GHz XScale today? Absolutely. Could I do so and deliver the best trade-off of power and performance inside a 1-watt envelope? No. You tend to design the chips differently to live inside different devices."
|
| |
|
|
|
10-24-2002, 06:36 PM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 390
|
|
On other news, government decides to ban these chips because they have higher thermal signiture than a small intercontinental ballistic missile, not to mention the global warming effect from such concentrated energy burst and the need of one mini nuclear powerplant to run each of this chip.
..but you can get 55,471 fps on quake.
|
| |
|
|
|
10-24-2002, 06:52 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 113
|
|
Sooner than 2010
Sooner than 2010, if moore's law holds up..and CPU clock speeds double every 18 months...currently we're at 2.8 ghz..by mid summer 2004 we're looking at almost 5 ghz. early 2006 ..we're going to see 8ghz to 10 ghz...so by 2008 we should have a 15 ghz cpu available.
But i think..CPU speeds are high enough right now. Considering that majority of the people barely use all of the cpu horse power available to them. Maybe the hardcore gamers do or the graphic/video artist.
What are we going to do with a 15 ghz cpu?
|
| |
|
|
|
10-24-2002, 07:19 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 30
|
|
Agreed. My 1 ghz laptop is suiting me just fine and there's just about nothing I do on a computer that needs more speed.
In the realm of speed, I'd be more interested in faster HD access times and faster wireless transfer rates via mobile devices. Perhaps when voice recognition and other revolutionary ideas become a staple of computing will we need anything faster than what we've currently got.
|
| |
|
|
|
10-24-2002, 07:28 PM
|
|
Theorist
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 276
|
|
Double the processor speed and hardly anyone will notice. Now, double the harddisk access speed and EVERYONE will notice. The harddrive makers are making the IDE/SCSI interfaces faster but I don't think any great strides have been made in how fast you get data off of the media.
I'd love to see a HD with a few hundred micro second average seek time but I don't think we'll see them any time soon if not ever...
|
| |
|
|
|
10-24-2002, 08:54 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 31
|
|
my guess
With that CPU power we will play games that have realistic physics, talking to each other, using voice commands, having a couple of cameras track our movements, battle with and against some quality AI, and then super textures to make things reallistic. Doing all that in a game requires some major cycles. Not to mention a 10 GHz video card with 2 gigs of ram.
Thats my next point. Ram is getting so cheap, and if they have the ram that is non-volitle, then why not just store things on RAM memory. Sure 1 terabyte HD would be great, but the access on things in RAM will beat any storage media. Give me a 5 gigs of RAM that I could store things to. Not many people remember, but on Macs you can (or used to could) make a RAM disk and store and read from it.
Same story for a ppc, non-voilite ram means you can have gigs on your handheld, with-out the power issues.
my $.02
|
| |
|
|
|
10-24-2002, 09:01 PM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 433
|
|
what aplication do we, as normal user need to use 15 ghz processor? i still wondering what we could do with 15 ghz processor? :?:
|
| |
|
|
|
10-24-2002, 10:05 PM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,023
|
|
I'm kinda sick of hearing the "why would we need it" talks. How on earth can so many people be so short sighted? :evil:
We're not talking about 15ghz computers tomorrow folks, we're talking about them 8 years from now. Better make that 10 before I could afford one. Don't look blindly at your desktop today and say you'll never use it. That's every bit as foolish as looking at your computer 10 years ago and saying it's all you ever need.
Personally, I use every bit of juice my comp can give me, and 10 years from now I plan to do the same. If you can't keep up, then that just means you're gonna have some really cheap computers to look forward to.
|
| |
|
|
|
10-24-2002, 10:17 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 151
|
|
Rirath, spoken like a true pc addict. i love my comp, 10 years from now, i will love my new comp. as long as software and hardware keep up with each other, it will all be fine.
|
| |
|
|
|
10-24-2002, 10:27 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 113
|
|
Re: my guess
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by a.l.i.c.e.
Thats my next point. Ram is getting so cheap, and if they have the ram that is non-volitle, then why not just store things on RAM memory. Sure 1 terabyte HD would be great, but the access on things in RAM will beat any storage media. Give me a 5 gigs of RAM that I could store things to. Not many people remember, but on Macs you can (or used to could) make a RAM disk and store and read from it.
Same story for a ppc, non-voilite ram means you can have gigs on your handheld, with-out the power issues.
my $.02
|
Well you can do that right now. For example, I have 1.5 gig of DDR ram on my primary workstation that I use for developing/coding, graphics and gaming. (I bought it last year when ram was really really really cheap)But I was rarely using more than 1 gig..so what do i do with the unused ram? Well I created a 1 gig ram drive using RamDiskPro for xp. XP treats the ram drive as any other drive. Ramdiskpro has a nifty feature where you can install a application on your ram disk and when before you shutdown my pc, it will write that installation to a IDE harddrive..the benifit of this is , that applications like photoshop will open up in less than 5 secs. Also..it comes in handy when do video capturing. No more dropped frames even when capturing high res video.
I also agree..instead of increasing cpu speed, tech companies should focus more on bringing more usuability to current technologies..such as Harddrive seek time , Faster wireless, and better intuitive voice regcognition. Basically better through put on a motherboard would help.
I don't want virtual reality type technology or facial regcognition technology that a lot of futurist are predicting. I just care about improving existing technology such as the things mentioned above.
As for gaming performance increase..well video graphics cards are already doing that and most of the cpu load is being handled by them. Video cards will only get better over time.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
