Support NeoGAF

[Vieo]

... what speed do you think P4's will be at? Do you think they would have managed to hit or break the 4GHz barrier?

 

[Lathentar]

What are you talking about... I'm using Longhorn right now....

Oh wait, I'm working on it.

Anyways, think P4s will still be around in late 2006?

 

[goodcow]

AMD WILL HAVE SHUT INTEL DOWN BY THEN.

 

[retardboy]

Intel's new Pentium-M desktop processors will be out by then.

 

[teh_pwn]

Clock speed increases will get smaller. They already have, have you not noticed? in two years we've gone from 3.4 to 3.8. Wow...

I would expect 4+ core 3.6-4.0 GHz 64-bit processors. When running on 64-bit software that uses multiple cores, it should be many times faster than today.

 

[GhaleonEB]

AMD WILL HAVE SHUT INTEL DOWN BY THEN.

:lol

 

[dilbert627]

Both Intel and AMD are getting away from pushing pure clock speed to focus on adding more features to improve performance (mainly dual-core, bigger caches, 64-bit, etc). So while 4Ghz is inevitable, clock speed is becoming less relevant, hence the rise of confusing naming conventions.

Here's a roadmap chart I found on anandtech:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2445

 

[ChrisReid]

... what speed do you think P4's will be at? Do you think they would have managed to hit or break the 4GHz barrier?

I dunno.. we're only at 3.8 GHz now. Think they can manage to push up that last .2 GHz in a year and a half?

 

[shantyman]

Both Intel and AMD are getting away from pushing pure clock speed to focus on adding more features to improve performance (mainly dual-core, bigger caches, 64-bit, etc). So while 4Ghz is inevitable, clock speed is becoming less relevant, hence the rise of confusing naming conventions.

Here's a roadmap chart I found on anandtech:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2445

AMD just released a new processor, very expensive one, that runs at 2.8 Ghz. It's considered the fastest x86 proccessor to date.

Here is a bit from a review:

This new flagship processor, clocked at 2800MHz (the highest external frequency ever seen on an AMD processor product) with 1MiB of L2 cache memory and the full gamut of features and ISA support that a latest-revision San Diego core brings, raises the bar in terms of overall single-core x86 performance, usually by the rough 7% clock increase FX-57 gets over the 2600MHz FX-55.

Gaming performance is simply unmatched and for the target Athlon 64 FX audience, that's paramount. The well-heeled enthusiast and gamer are the guys and gals picking up the FX range, the unlocked multiplier and high-frequency, full cache performance really appealing to them. High price is the only barrier to the fastest stock-clocked gaming performance money can currently buy.

 

[Afro Thunder]

Cell will own AMD and Intel...



Sorry, I can't resist. AMD all the way.