Slashdot Mirror


AMD Makes 10-Nanometer Transistor

Yorrike writes: "Reuters is reporting that AMD are about to reveal their smallest double-gate transistor to date. From the article: 'The gate of the transistor, across which electrical current flows to turn the switch on, measures 10 nanometers, or 10 billionths of a meter.' The article goes on to suggest that this may lead to a 1 billion transistor chip."

180 comments

  1. i wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    i wonder how many houses you could heat with ine of these?

    1. Re:i wonder by HermesHuang · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The point of making it smaller is so there's less current flow, and thus less heat. Granted, they'll pack more in, so the overall effect will probably be more heat generation, but per transistor, smaller ones do generate less heat.

    2. Re:i wonder by matrix29 · · Score: 2

      The point of making it smaller is so there's less current flow, and thus less heat. Granted, they'll pack more in, so the overall effect will probably be more heat generation, but per transistor, smaller ones do generate less heat.

      You are right though. The smaller they make them the more they'll pack in. Without some kind of active cooling system in the chip the thing will glow like a hotplate.

      "The star that burns twice as bright burns half as long." - Bladerunner (the movie, not the 1974 book about a renegade surgeon that performs operations and smuggles medical supplies in a world where medical care is free only if you submit to castration after the Earth was plagued by a lethal spinal meningitis flu. It involves the concept of a national healthcare system overwhelmed by a viral outbreak and the problem of skyrocketing costs to the nation and a eugenics shortcut to cut corners). GOOGLE up [ "Alan Nourse" "Bladerunner" ] or [ "Alan Nourse" "Blade Runner" ] to understand.

      --
      "Face it, a nation that maintains a 72% approval rating on George W. Bush is a nation with a very loose grip on reality.
  2. dewt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    first post?

  3. That's nice... by cornjchob · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    but until they name their procs with undeceptive names, I'll still wonder what's going on there.

    --
    We now have confirmed reports from an informed Orange County minister that Ethel is still an active communist.
    1. Re:That's nice... by AlgUSF · · Score: 1

      Nice Troll!

      AMD has to use the naming convention they do, because Intel is making this a race marketing that more GHz means a faster processor. Intel has been engineering their procs for higher clock rate, so that they can market them better against AMD procs that are just as fast with a lower clock rate.

      --


      I want my rights back. I was actually using them when our government stole them after 9/11.
    2. Re:That's nice... by cornjchob · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's true. I'd take an AMD at a slower clock rate anyday. But when consumers learn the real speed they're going, they don't like it. I've had a bunch of people buy new AMD systems, and when I tell them what speed they're actually running at, they get skeptical and don't want to buy from AMD again, even after I explain. Consumers don't like being lied to, and for the most part, aren't as dumb as some people make them out to be.

      --
      We now have confirmed reports from an informed Orange County minister that Ethel is still an active communist.
    3. Re:That's nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Well then there is the fact that (MHZ be fucked)the fastest AMD proc is slower than the fastest intel proc. Don't forget about that now.

    4. Re:That's nice... by Outland+Traveller · · Score: 1

      The simplest way to combat this misperception is to tell someone how much more they would have payed for a comparable performance Intel chip.

    5. Re:That's nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just explain to them that Intel is taking advantage of their lack of technical expertise. Use the RPM vs horsepower analogy. AMD is being far more honest than intel- they are telling you how well their processor performs, rather than how many times it goes clink every second.

    6. Re:That's nice... by doozer · · Score: 1

      Actually, while it's true that most people aren't as dumb as we think they are,
      it's only after the sale that any form of intelligence can be found.

      During the sale, and while you're still at the store, it's all about
      the big numbers.

    7. Re:That's nice... by rabidcow · · Score: 2

      Consumers don't like being lied to

      Yeah, but who's lying to them?

      AMD rates their processors with a number that looks like a clock speed, but isn't labelled as one.

      Intel gives their processors a high clock speed and implies that that makes them inherently superior, when it clearly doesn't.

      Technically, neither is lying, but they're both being slightly dishonest. And what are people gonna do to avoid being "lied" to, buy a Mac?

    8. Re:That's nice... by glwtta · · Score: 2

      you are right, this week Intel is faster again... I can never keep up with these things.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    9. Re:That's nice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG! 1n73l is 40xo41n9 AMD! Wha7 a43 7h3y t0 d0?
      H3y, I kn0w! Th3y will 43l3a53 a n3w fuck1n9 ch1p l1n3 and 439a1n 7h3 c40wn! OMFG LMAO K3wl 63an5 m33 700!

      That is what I think about your "well-thought out" post. Testify!

    10. Re:That's nice... by athlon02 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, consumers don't like to be lied to and while Intel's deception that GHz is all that matters and AMD's relative speed naming may turn consumers off... how many of them really *need* the extra speed? Sure I can figure out what to do with 2GHz of speed with xyz IPC (or CPI in my comp. architecture course this past spring) to take the utmost advantage of the speed, but what Joe Schmoe off the streets can do that too?

      You've got those that just e-mail and chat online along with listen to CDs or watch DVDs... we're not exactly talking techie types that want bleeding edge stuff.

    11. Re:That's nice... by AltismoMaster · · Score: 1

      When talking about the 'speed' of AMD vs. Intel I make the following analogy (it works every time)

      Note: I tell this to non-math non-technical people. The don't want to hear about the details. So *don't* do the math, just imagine it...

      "Think of a freeway. If you are standing next to a freeway, the number of cars going past is the amount of work being done. Obviously the more cars going past, the better. Intel builds a two lane freeway, with cars going 200 miles per hour. AMD builds a 5 lane freeway with cars going 100 miles per hour.

      Either way, you have about the same number of cars going past. "

      Them "Ahhh... so where is the Mega-Hertz thing?"

      Answer: "That's the speed of the cars."

      Them: "So the Mega-Hertz isn't really how fast the computer goes? "

      Answer: "It's just one aspect."

      If this conversation went further - I would throw something in like : comparing AMD vs Intel clock speeds is not accurate, because your dealing with different designs (number of lanes, speed of the cars.... )

      --
      Create music
  4. I'm confused by Syncdata · · Score: 2, Funny

    But how many of these transistors would fit on a single human hair?

    --
    "Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
    1. Re:I'm confused by Raul654 · · Score: 2, Informative

      IIRC, a human hair is .25 mm in diameter. (.25 thousanths of a meter) The transistors are 10 nanometers (billionths of a meter)

      (.25*10^-3)/(10*10^-9)=25,000 transistors would fit into the diameter of a human hair.

      --


      To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
      --E.C. Stanton
    2. Re:I'm confused by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      Certain newspapers always ask, 'how many of these would equal the height of a double-decker bus?'.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    3. Re:I'm confused by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2

      "25,000 transistors would fit into the diameter of a human hair."

      They run all over, so be VERY CAREFUL not to spill them!

    4. Re:I'm confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow, you've fat hair. :)
      SCNR :-)

    5. Re:I'm confused by Lxy · · Score: 2

      And how many libraries of congress can it process per second?

      --

      There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
      :wq
    6. Re:I'm confused by shadow303 · · Score: 1

      Silly rabbit, you don't put transistors on human hairs- you put them on chicken feathers.

      --
      I've got a mind like a steel trap - it's got an animal's foot stuck in it.
    7. Re:I'm confused by jorgen · · Score: 1
      IIRC, a human hair is .25 mm in diameter. (.25 thousanths of a meter)

      No, it's around 0.05mm. That would be 5000 transistors then...

      Maybe you should try a pubic hair instead, they're slightly thicker.. :)

  5. AMD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    pretty soon amd will be making little plastic jesii that sit on your dashboard and say "OOOOOH LOOK AT THE RACOOOONS" hehehehe

    that's assuming that you live in a locality that has racoons

  6. related article by subspacemsg · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    In a similar story M$ puts billion bugs per OS

  7. Dr. Evil's CPU... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dr. Evil: "And I will design a chip with transistors... 1 MILLION transistors!"

    #2: "Uh, Dr. Evil, we've already designed a chip with 1 million transistors, quite a few years ago in fact."

    Dr. Evil: "How many is a lot then?"

    #2: "1 billion would be very impressive. We're working on that right now."

    Dr. Evil: "Alright then... 1 BILLION transistors."

    1. Re:Dr. Evil's CPU... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Number Two, I order you to number two!

    2. Re:Dr. Evil's CPU... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until AMD makes a statement that they will not support adding bullshit to their processors to assist Palladium, they are non-entities to me. I won't support a company that deliberately cripples its chips.

    3. Re:Dr. Evil's CPU... by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 2

      Then you'd better not support Intel, Transmeta, or any other company that hasn't made a "public statement" that they're not adding Palladium.

    4. Re:Dr. Evil's CPU... by mcg1969 · · Score: 1

      Well in fact, we already know that Intel plans to support Palladium in hardware, which I believe is part of what precipitated AC's comment.

    5. Re:Dr. Evil's CPU... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Dude, just use Linux and get over it. What, are you afraid you can't pirate other people's intellectual property anymore? You SHOULDN'T be doing that. Pay for what you use you fucking whore.

  8. 30 atoms wide by fredistheking · · Score: 0


    I don't see Moore's law holding up for much longer.

    1. Re:30 atoms wide by HermesHuang · · Score: 1

      They've been saying that for years and years now. As long as people continue thinking they need the "latest" in processor technology and shelling out money, the chip makers will find some way. transistors using only a few atoms have already been demonstrated, and people have been throwing quantum computing ideas around for a long time now. In fact, AMD and Intel probably both have active research into these fields, and I wouldn't be too surprised if in 5 years or so they try to one-up each other in trying to announce the first chip built using "single-atom" technology or some other crazy catchphrase like that.

    2. Re:30 atoms wide by Marx_Mrvelous · · Score: 1

      dude, you have been trolled ;) Anyone saying "moore's law" in an /. post is just trolling for replies. don't even bother!

      --

      Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
  9. I don't understand... by slipgun · · Score: 2

    The gate of the transistor, across which electrical current flows to turn the switch on...

    You mean there's another type of transistor?

    --
    SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
    1. Re:I don't understand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the BJT.

    2. Re:I don't understand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Yes. A non-double-gate one :)

    3. Re:I don't understand... by volsung · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Grammar Nazi sez: The comma means that the clause which follows it is a descriptive clause. It is there to describe the item preceding it, not to distinguish it from other items.

    4. Re:I don't understand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was to build up suspense and make the improvement sound larger than it is. this doesnt mean it isnt a large improvement. but you see how they play with your awareness.

    5. Re:I don't understand... by (void*) · · Score: 2
      And one of the ways to describe something is to mention its distinguishing characteristics that make it differ from other typical objects from the larger class of objects it is drawn from.


      In other words, it makes perfect sense to describe things this way, establishing a hierarchy of objects with more and more refinements upon the other. To to this is an indication that the person is systematic in thought. After all, it is trivial to describe an object using attributes that it shares with all other objects in its class.


      Imagine lurid story that begins this way: The man, having two legs and two arms, sat in the bushes hidden from his enemies. Is this a SF story about a men who do not have two legs and two arms?

    6. Re:I don't understand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes. a vacuum tube.

    7. Re:I don't understand... by quasi_steller · · Score: 1

      I may be going of topic, but there actually are two types of transistors: bipolor and FET.

      Bipolor is fast, but very difficult to manufacture on the small scales required for microprocessors.

      FET is slower, but is relativly easy to manufature on small scales. This is manufatured by over laping two thin "strips" of silicon over eachother like a cross. The width of the silicon "strip" is the path size. For the new chip this would be (correct me if I'm wrong) 10nm.

      Most chips use FET transistors because of the difficulties of manufaturing bipolor transistors.

      (I did have cool ascii-art diagrams of the two types of transistors, but aparently trying to explaing things well is considered lame on slashdot, and the lameness filter tried to stop me. ARGHHHH!!!!)

      --
      ...interesting if true.
    8. Re:I don't understand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually yes there is another type. This one has current go through it to turn on the "switch" making it a BJT (Bipolar Junction) i think

      A MOSFET (Metal Oxide Semiconductor Field Effect Transistor) has no current go through it to turn it on...

      This actually confuses me because i thought most transistors in processors were MOSFETs.

  10. Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I know that the Brits have a habit of pluralizing collective nouns (i.e., "AMD are working on their...") but frankly, it sounds completely inane. AMD is a company. It is only one company. It is to be used in the singular form, such as "AMD is working on its..." Furthermore, I don't see why Slashdot allows something foreign like that to get posted on 9/11, of all days.

    No offense, but I would appreciate it if you Brits could keep your little grammatical peccadillos to yourself for just one day. On the anniversary for the Canary Wharf bombing, you can post whatever you want. Today, we'd just like a little bit of respect.

    1. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      On behalf of the British people, I apolgise that our language is disrepectful to Americans - we'll change it right away.

    2. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thanks

    3. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2

      Yes AMD is "a" company made up of "many" people.

      So what it boils down to is do you define the company as an entity or the sum of it's people.

      Sorry, I'm having my pendanticivitis diagnosed tomorrow!

    4. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Karamchand · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      ah come one, yea? Could you Americans be at least one day in the year not be such suckers? Don't be ridiculous... the BRITS are the ones who "invented" english so they can speak (write) whatever they want.

    5. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was buying some coloured alumunium from my neighbourhood shoppe, and just as I was about to sign my cheque, it dawned on me..."Fuck those fucking brit fucks. We stole their language fair and square. Just because they invented it doesn't mean they can go around spelling things all different and fancy. And don't put milk in tea. That's fucking gross."

    6. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're retards, total stinkin retards.

      You ever see British Porn? It's worse than Canadian Porn! Christ!

    7. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First of all, I believe that there's more than one person working for AMD. So the reasonable thing would be to write "AMD are...". And try to understand that no one except americans give a shit about the 9/11 thing, and sure as hell wouldn't change their language because of it.

    8. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by mcg1969 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The correct verb choice has nothing to do with how many people work at AMD. "AMD" is a single entity, and as such should be used singular forms of a verb. Subjects such as "Engineers at AMD" or "Scientists at AMD" would require a plural form.

      So in American English at least, the original Anonymous Coward is correct... though frankly I thought that it was just a mistake, not a Britishism.

    9. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But on a kinder note, fellas, thanks for sending The Beatles our way. We really enjoyed them, at least until they got all Eastern mystical on us and such.

    10. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by hugesmile · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Regardless of whether one considers AMD plural or singular, there's an inconsistency. The headline says "AMD Makes..." and the body of the article says "AMD are".

      PS. it's singular, and the headline is correct. But I hates the nit-pickers.

    11. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it doesn't boil down to that at all. For the purposes of grammar, AMD is "a" company. Period.

    12. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Black Sabbath, till they fired Ozzy, that is

    13. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot are gay.

    14. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I guess if that is true welcome to the club denial boy. You wanker.

    15. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2

      Yes it *does* boil down to all that. I hate to disrpupt your perfect little universe, but just because you can't accept another viewpoint doesn't makes yours the *only* viewpoint.

      You can move the whole universe if you view yourself as the center..

      You can't move the whole universe if you don't view yourself as the center..

      Both are correct statements depending on your viewpoint.

      A giant calls me an ant.
      An ant calls me a giant.

      Both statements are true yet they are in opposition.

      Learn Perspective!

    16. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I'm closeminded if I refused to accept another's viewpoint that 1+1=3, eh? Quite interesting. I will gladly be closeminded then.

    17. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2

      If your happy with the "I don't believe it so it can't exist mentality...more power to ya!"

      I think that's also known as sticking ones head in the sand.

    18. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fine, I can accept that. What pissed me off was that the original Anonymous Coward presented it in such a stupid way. He thinks that everyone else should sound like an american on that day? He wants "respect"? He doesn't understand why something so foreign was allowed to be posted on the 11th september? I don't understand how he made it through third grade, assuming that he did.

  11. Same. by Perdo · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is the same transistor that IBM was talking about. They are sharing (or stealing) this technology. Electron microscope pictures are of the same transistor.

    --

    If voting were effective, it would be illegal by now.

    1. Re:Same. by tshak · · Score: 2

      Or stealing? Was that comment even necessary? It's no secret that AMD and IBM have worked together in the past.

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    2. Re:Same. by unicron · · Score: 2, Informative

      Intel employee: You built a 10nm transistor! We we're doing that! You must've stolen it!

      AMD employee: You are aware we make the same product, right? Any technological advances either one of us makes, rest assured the other isn't far behind. Surely you don't think you are the only cpu manufacturer interested in reducing transistor size, right?

      Intel employee: I'll shut up now.

      --
      Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
  12. no more mhz benchmark? by chris_mahan · · Score: 3, Funny

    What, where's not going to benchmark on Mhz cycles anymore?

    I can already picture this:

    "Buy Intel's new Pentra Plus 2004, the only processor with a billion transistors!!!" (yay, men in blue dance yadda yadda)

    --

    "Piter, too, is dead."

    1. Re:no more mhz benchmark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They'd have to make the "# of transistors" unit of measure a little flashier, like GigaTits.

    2. Re:no more mhz benchmark? by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      Well, see when you get transistors that teensy-weensy they're hard to find on the workbench!

      And don't even get me started on mounting heatsinks on these tiny buggers...

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  13. -9112001, Troll, Flamebait and Offtopic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Today, we remember all the trolls who died.

    We remember you mr goatse.

  14. It's amazing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    every year I can process my pr0n faster and faster.

  15. nanometers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The metric system is the tool of the devil. Us Americans are supposed to measure these things in 1/16777216th-of-an-inch, and you know it.

    1. Re:nanometers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever heard of SI? This international system...? Please take a look at http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/ then. Thanks.

    2. Re:nanometers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, if it was like that then we could use hexadecimal and it would be just like metric.

  16. Intel and the Itanium 2 by cyberbob2010 · · Score: 0

    Is it just me or is the Itanium supposed to have 13 billion transistors . I'm new to this stuff so please some one show me where I'm not reading this right. I'm looking at their ad in Wired and I see Itanium two with 13 billion transistors. ????? one billion that big of a deal....??? HELP!!!!!! I'm IGNORANT!!!!!!!!

    --
    We seldom regret saying too little but often regret saying too much.
    1. Re:Intel and the Itanium 2 by ackthpt · · Score: 1
      Itanium II is supposed to have only 500 Million transistors.

      Find the 2N2222 in this picture and win a prize!

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:Intel and the Itanium 2 by pixelated77 · · Score: 1

      that transistor count include an enourmous amount of on-die cache, 1 billion transistors is impressive when you consider that it's just the core, not L2 cache.

  17. Yay by GMFTatsujin · · Score: 2

    Faster invalidation of digital media than you ever thought possible!
    GMFTatsujin

    1. Re:Yay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that's the old way. Now it goes: invalidation of more digital media than you ever thought possible!

  18. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 11/9 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We british put the day first not the month.

  19. Now let's see them fab it by Snarfvs+Maximvs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Great, but AMD needs to get their .13 micron process stable first.

    --
    -----------------------

    To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion.

    1. Re:Now let's see them fab it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not keeping up on the late-breaking old news are we?

  20. Re:Please, no Britishisms on 11/9 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine the mass confusion if something really horrible were to happen in UKia on November 9th!

    "9/11" would have true international significance!

  21. Billionth? by Verne · · Score: 1

    That's not a billionth, that's only a thousand millionth.

    A billionth would be 10^-12

    Silly americans.....

    --


    There are only two things in this world that smell like fish. And one of them's fish...
    1. Re:Billionth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      piss off, you fucking monkey

    2. Re:Billionth? by myshkinbob · · Score: 1

      It's probably not the best reason for my first /. post but it was a billionth, 10^-12 is a trillionth. It would be more logical for a million millions to be a billion, because a thousand thousands is a million, but by that reasoning a thousand should be one hundred hundreds and not ten hundreds. Anyway forgive the pedantic first user post but there's too much misinformation on /. already. Oh and the "silly americans" comment makes me fearful you might be british, say it ain't so!

    3. Re:Billionth? by Verne · · Score: 1

      nah, I'm not British, I'm a New Zealander!

      We do in NZ however follow the British definition for a billion, which IS one million million....

      Welcome to slashdot :)

      --


      There are only two things in this world that smell like fish. And one of them's fish...
    4. Re:Billionth? by myshkinbob · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the welcome :)

      I'm actually a brit myself, I never knew we used a different definition of billion here (and there too it seems), in fact when I was at school doing physics and economics A-levels we were taught to use the 10^9 version.

      Oh well, I expect it came over with McDonalds or something. Thanks for educating me on my own country's mathematical scales, heh.

    5. Re:Billionth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Silly Americans also use "M" for "thousands". It drives me nuts when I see "MM" in reports meaning "millions".

    6. Re:Billionth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what exactly do you call 1,000,000,000 in New Zealand?!

      At first I thought you were crazy, but in German it works like that:

      1,000,000 Million
      1,000,000 Milliard
      1,000,000,000 Billion

      What do you claim the real English is?

    7. Re:Billionth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry , I meant:

      1,000,000 Million
      1,000,000,000 Milliard
      1,000,000,000,000 Billion

    8. Re:Billionth? by Yorrike · · Score: 2
      Um. No.

      I'm not sure which New Zealand YOU live in, but the New Zealand standard for 1 billion is 1*10^9 not 1*10^12

      This is one of the rare occasions where I agree with the American definition, since it's useful. Who the hell would want to say 1 thousound million when they can just say 1 billion?

      --

      Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?

    9. Re:Billionth? by Yorrike · · Score: 1
      I know, replying to my own post, but to avoid further embarrassment, I will confirm that no one would ever say "thousound", but rather "thousand".

      ....... still a billion is a thousand million.

      --

      Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?

    10. Re:Billionth? by Verne · · Score: 1

      So you obviously live in a lazy incorrect part of NZ.

      My guess is Auckland.

      --


      There are only two things in this world that smell like fish. And one of them's fish...
    11. Re:Billionth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody would say that, they'd say something like "milliard" for 1,000,000,000 (and then "billion" for 1,000,000,000,000)...

      Although, to be exact, in Finland we say "miljoona, miljardi, biljoona" respectively but you get the point ;-)

    12. Re:Billionth? by Yorrike · · Score: 1
      No, I'm not JAFA.

      And I'm not lazy. As I said, it's one of the few American definitions I agree with. I still spell colour with a "u", night with a "ight" and I know the difference between "then" and "than".

      --

      Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?

    13. Re:Billionth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alight then, what exactly is a trillion to the kiwis?!

    14. Re:Billionth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also from NZ, and I've *never* heard a billion being used to mean 10^12. When things like GDP are talked about, it's measured in billions, and unless NZ is a lot richer than I'm aware, they're not dealing with 10^12.

      Nor is a billionaire someone with $10^12 - if that were the case, not even Bill Gates would come close.

    15. Re:Billionth? by Bloater · · Score: 1

      > I know the diffence between "then" and "than"

      And the difference between "insure" and "ensure" - I hate that one.

      How do Americans spell "light"? I bet they have some silly way of spelling "hiccough" too.

    16. Re:Billionth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      same in French, and it goes on after with "trilliard"...

      und ich denke dass wir richtig sind ;-) (or sthg like that)

    17. Re:Billionth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well most European languages call a million million a billion but have a word for a thousand million, too, which is a "milliard" (in French, just pronounce it appropriatly; in German it's "Milliarde").

    18. Re:Billionth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about a thousand million would be 10^9 wich is a Milliard. Pretty common in Brittain and anything outside the States.

      But given that most of slashdot is American a billion would/should be understood by everyone.

  22. Sweet by miketang16 · · Score: 0

    HAHAH! You love it Intel! Let's see your 10 nanometer transistor. Well we probably will soon, but whatever...

    --
    -------
    "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
    -- George Orwell
  23. Room to spare! by rot26 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just think about all the DRM they can pack into that baby!

    --



    To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
  24. Press Release Slants by FuzzyDaddy · · Score: 5, Informative
    It's amazing how two press reports on the same breakthrough claim it's significant for entirely different reasons.

    The earlier press release talked, in a half assed way, about the performance benefits. This one talks, in a half assed way, about the reduced size.

    Of course, this happens because whoever digests these things for us unwashed masses doesn't understand what the hell they're talking about.

    And the gate length has much more to do with the performance, not the transistor density, as the transistor density is dominated by the via sizes and interconnect sizes.

    --
    It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
    1. Re:Press Release Slants by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 1

      Most of the masses wash, I think its just Slashdot masses that don't.

  25. If sold in "Everything Scottish".... by echucker · · Score: 4, Funny

    .... this would be the "wee" size. "Not so wee" and "friggin' huge!" are now obsolete.

  26. Great marketing sloga (?) by Raul654 · · Score: 2

    "So small that they power the palm pilot used by the angel dancing on the head of a pin?"

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
  27. Re:I'm confused - gay karma whore. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Thats such a gay karma whore. "Lets use a calculator garf guh huh garsh. Geeze guys I can use a calculator!"

    Oh, a human hair. That clears it all up! What's wrong with relativistic comparison to things that are SIMILAR? Is it not okay just to understand that the smaller the process, the better?

    10nm. Smaller than 90nm good. 130nm too. Wheeee! Bigger better faster more. Nothing to do with human hairs.

    Why not put it in terms of the diameter of a hair from a Pig's ass? Why a human hair? How does the human hair help anyone understand how small soemthing is when its on an atomic scale?

    Oh, yes, and 25bn xistors fit in the diameter of your thumb! And there are billions of atoms at a pinhead. SHUT UP. If your fart's atoms were all transistors, you just fartred out a PENTIUM 4!

    How about this one, chew on this, time goes on -forever. Thats fover human hairs wide! Thats forever big bangs, that an ulimited number of episodes of Star Trek.

    Its more important to try and tell people the change in voltage, current, why more transistors would help, etc. You telling me there is MA out there that can use MORE right now? How about failure rates? Why is it hard? You don't know you whore.

    NO!

    Here on Slashcrap, to be insightful or informative or interesting, you don't have to say anything important - or even correct, or even relavent. You have to say something popular or something that the "stupid masses" get easily.

  28. Heat Sink? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Imagine the size of the heatsink you'd need for a chip with 1 billion transistors.

    1. Re:Heat Sink? by afidel · · Score: 2

      The HP-PA8800 is already a thrid of the way there with over 300 million transistors. For more info see here . At the rate of Moore's Law we will be to a billion transistors on the biggest chips in less than 3 years.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  29. So many more transistors all on one chip... by The+Fanta+Menace · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...and with the new DRM capabilities, it'll be able to do so much less.

    --
    -- Even if a god did exist, why the fsck should I worship it?
    1. Re:So many more transistors all on one chip... by zapfie · · Score: 1

      Linux obviously needs some DRM kernel modules to catch up with Windows.

      --
      slashdot!=valid HTML
  30. WTF is a triple-gate transistor??? by inl101 · · Score: 1

    >For its part, Intel INTC.O plans to detail its development and manufacture of triple-gate transistors in a paper it is delivering at a technical conference next week in Japan, Intel President and Chief Operating Officer Paul Otellini told an Intel conference on Monday.

    I do research on double-gate transistors. I have no clue what they mean by a triple-gate transistor. I think that this is another lame intel PR attempt. It's probably like when they made up a new name for FDSOI and called it depleted-substrate or some BS like that and got laughed at. They must want to be one gate better.

    1. Re:WTF is a triple-gate transistor??? by Cyno01 · · Score: 2

      triple gate, trinary logic gates, not just 1 or 0, on or of, but 0, 1 and somethethign else (.5? 2? off, low, high?), this gives us a 3rd posibility which means less cycles needed which means its faster

      --
      "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    2. Re:WTF is a triple-gate transistor??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heard the russians tried this in the cold war and succeded, but canned it because of instability...and i really need to register a slashdot name...ah well.

      Anyway, trinary logic would be a fun concept to play with, if only i had tweesers small enough to open and close the gates.

    3. Re:WTF is a triple-gate transistor??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have toyed with the idea too. It could be 1, 0, -1. Then maybe you could use AC instead of DC ;-)

      -AC

    4. Re:WTF is a triple-gate transistor??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's because whoever wrote the article is an idiot. the FinFET is NOT a double-gate transistor. it's a single gate wrapped around the channel, which is raised above the substrate.

  31. Blah.... by GuardianAli · · Score: 1

    What pisses me off is that al this is well and good..intel finds this..amd finds that... but i hate WAITING for the tech. to actually be used to some benefit to the end user.

    Yea. this means smaller and faster chips for amd..but when...10 years from now?

    1. Re:Blah.... by Scrameustache · · Score: 2

      Well, they have to announce it to enhance shareholder's value.

      + they need to lay the foundation for the hype of the future.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    2. Re:Blah.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IBM make the chips for amd using IBM technology....
      Motorola make chips for apple which moto licensed from IBM..
      Hello............IBM is an innovator ....
      You what performance BUY an apple ........and remember
      (IBM inside)

  32. You have much anger young jedi by Cosmicfool · · Score: 0

    You must let go of fear and anger, or they will consume you. Do not turn to the dark side.

  33. Buy a toothbrush too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    while you're at it.

    Thank You.

  34. Practical use by MalleusEBHC · · Score: 0

    Yeah this sounds great and all, but what about practical uses? I mean, will this really help porn viewing *that* much?

  35. Re:I'm confused - humor attempt = shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    i just wanted you to know that wasn't funny. your attempt at humor is shit.

  36. HEAT by Cosmicfool · · Score: 0

    What's the deal with heat in relation to size of transistor? Would a smaller bunch of transistors grouped more ferociously together create more heat? ??

    1. Re:HEAT by ketilf · · Score: 1

      The heat is generated from current running through transistors, and the current is proportional to the width/length ratio of the transistor. With smaller transistors, both width and length decrease, so the current stays the same. Of course, the current is also a function of the voltage across the transistor, and this has decreased some over the last few years, but it's at just over 2v on my celeron 300, and they can't go very much lower without getting into strange technologies like FGUVMOS-transistors and stuff like that (and they won't, at least not for a long time!).

      Anyway, the answer to your question is that the same number of transistors made smaller and bunched together would be warmer because heat dissipation decreases with decreased surface area, even though the energy produced by these is the same. If you put more and smaller transistors into the same area, you will get more energy and more heat.

  37. poor AMD... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

    When will AMD realize that people don't care how *fast* their PC is, but that it has a life affirming, penis enlarging number attached to it!

    How does this sound; the AMD 10 GHZ noipcon. Sure, it has the IPC of an 8088, but 10 GHZ -- lets see Intel beat *that*!

    --
    It's been a long time.
  38. Re:I'm confused - emoticon overuse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    to use a lame coinage from the bowels of AOL marketing, emoticon; you use them too much, it makes you look like a prancing, traipsing online flaming fag. please stop.

  39. Re:I'm confused - gay karma whore. by Raul654 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1) It's a basic idea in engineering that when you are dealing with something abstract (and these are so small that they qualify), then you have to relate it to something familiar.
    2) (To quote from Billy Madison)
    what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
  40. logout now says bugtraq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Hey,

    I noticed that Slashdot has a nasty bug, which, I imagine is a fault of
    Slashcode. On certain occassions, you can find a very interesting Referer
    string for some visitiors of pages mentioned on this site. One of such
    entries:

    63.XXX.XXX.175 - - [11/Sep/2002:18:13:33 +0200] "GET /newtcp/ HTTP/1.1"
    200 33541 "http://slashdot.org/?unickname=dXXg&passwd=rXXXX3 "
    "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826"
    [lcamtuf.coredump.cx]

    Go figure. This does not seem to be a consistent pattern, of thousands
    hits from Slashdot only about 15-20 were like that today, so it seems like
    a specific condition have to be met, yet it's not that uncommon - I'd
    guess it happens right after you login and click on the link. I did not
    investigate it too much, but it seems to me that Slashcode is fairly
    popular and used in quite a few places - and that's a nice example of why
    GET shouldn't be used for forms. This is based exclusively on the real
    world observation of this pattern.

    I gave Slashdot a short notice because it does not really matter how fast
    you patch it - once public, people can grep their webserver logs for past
    entries anyway.

    --
    Michal Zalewski

  41. Re:I'm confused - humor attempt = shit by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2

    I wasn't trying to be funny. They DO run all over!

    I think you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.

  42. In SF, you have to mention the obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this a SF story about a men who do not have two legs and two arms?

    Could be.

  43. Shhhhhh! Don't tell the RIAA! by GeneralEmergency · · Score: 3, Funny


    Once the RIAA gets news of this I'm sure they'll find some hack think-tank that will make the proclamation that according to their data, there is a direct correlation over time between "Transistors Per CPU" and "Music Piracy". Lawyer parties will follow.



    (When I started typing this, I was making a joke. But now that I've read it back a few times, this looks more probable than improbable.)

    --
    "A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
    GeneralEmergency
    1. Re:Shhhhhh! Don't tell the RIAA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (When I started typing this, I was making a joke. But now that I've read it back a few times, this looks more probable than improbable.)

      No, it doesn't look probable. Your post just looks stupid. It's annoying how RIAA FUD is guaranteed to show up on any slashdot thread these days. I agree that the RIAA do some things that we really hate, but please leave your FUD at home.

  44. That's Nothing.... by Tsali · · Score: 1

    ... (snaps suspenders)

    I've got a 9 nm transmitter right here in my pocket I just whipped up the other day.

    --
    This space for rent.
    1. Re:That's Nothing.... by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      That's your penis.

      Quit playing with it or you'll go blind.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:That's Nothing.... by Tsali · · Score: 1

      Nanotweezers! The next great invention!

      --
      This space for rent.
  45. CMOS Technology ??? by Proudrooster · · Score: 4, Interesting
    "AMD said its laboratory demonstration of 10 nanometer Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor Fin Field Effect Transistor (CMOS FinFET) is the outcome of collaborative research between AMD and the University of California, Berkeley"
    CMOS technology with a silicon "fin" to prevent electron leakage?
    Where on earth am I going to find a motherboard for a CMOS processor?
    First CMOS, then Silicon, then Gallium (what ever happened GaAs anyway?), then Coppermine, and now back to CMOS with a silicon fin.....
    Mmmrrrppphh, full circle you have come young Jedi.
    -Yoda
    1. Re:CMOS Technology ??? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      First CMOS, then Silicon, then Gallium (what ever happened GaAs anyway?), then Coppermine, and now back to CMOS with a silicon fin....

      You must not have watched Sesame Street as a child.

      Which of these things doesn't belong?

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    2. Re:CMOS Technology ??? by eechuah · · Score: 1

      WTF are you talking about? CMOS is used by everyone to make chips. It's a circuit technology, not a material. Silicon is a material, CMOS is the way you put 2 complementary transistors MADE OUT OF SILICON (and other stuff) together to create an inverter (or whatever other logic you want).

  46. I can't resist by ACNeal · · Score: 0

    Could you even see a Beowolf cluster of these?

    1. Re:I can't resist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes we could, please stop asking now.

  47. Re:I'm confused - gay karma whore. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    So you, the pseudo academic loser quotes Adam Sandler to prove a point?

    A testament to your moronic m.o.

  48. Re:I'm confused - humor attempt = shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    You are like that crazy dutchman from Austin Powers 3, Goldmember. Do you eat your skin too?

  49. Re:I'm confused - gay karma whore. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    You, an engineer? HAHAHAHHAHA. I would't trust you to engineer a McDonald's plastic toy.

    And then, Mr. Scientist Engineer quotes someone talking about God laying mercy on someone's soul.

    You've been reading Mary Shelly or some shit, talking all this crap with God and science.

    [Rasta Voice]You want voilence, get yourself a gun. You want knowledge, get yourself a SCIENTIST. Your scarin' me now, Miistah Scientist!

  50. ooooooooh by athlon02 · · Score: 1

    Now I'm wondering if I should concern myself with getting a hold of a clawhammer or wait until they re-engineer them on a 0.01 micron process :) And since AMD acquired Alchemy Corp. imagine what kind of power you could pack in a PDA... say a really low power duron at 1GHz with some DDR chips (not modules of course) soldered on the PDA's board and maybe a mobile GeForce chipset...

    Ah but that's probably 10 years down the road anyways... Sometimes it's painful to know about future technologies, but not be able to get em yet :)

  51. FinFET Technology by taylor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It seems the real question of relevance rests in the new technology they're using to build these devices. The FinFETs have a nice writeup here. They can be built just with the defects from plateaus in normal photo-lithographic processes, thus using the nicely developed techniques usually limited to 125 nm structures to build 10 nm structures. This still means the overall transistor size will be on the order of a a few hundred nm, to deal with contacts, etc, but it is a sight better than standard 0.13 micron transistors, and much easier to use in mass production than e-beam lithography. (Just think about those old vector displays -- that's ebeam lithography for you). Seems like a fine idea for nanoscale structure building, and not one of these technologies may have impacts far beyond just standard IC circuit technology; with 10 nm devices, all sorts of quantum coherent processes become accessible, if you work for them.

    1. Re:FinFET Technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Am I the only one here who thinks Fin Fet sounds like a character out of a Star Wars movie?

  52. Re:I'm confused - gay karma whore. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    The guy was right. Probably posted AC to avoid moderation. The little bitch was a Karma Whore who said nothing worth looking at. Now the AC is punished fior his unpopular complaint. CENSORED.
    CENSORED. CENSORED. CENSORED. CENSORED.

    This is just another example of spineless crap moderation here on /.

    Mao Tse Tung, Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Pinochet, Mussolini, Marshall Joseph Tito, Slobodan Milosevic, Idi Amin, Ho Chi Minh, Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qaddafi, Juan Peron, Ayatollah Khomeini, Ferdinand Marcos, General Suharto, Pol Pot, Fransisco Franco, and certainly the worst of the bunch, SLASHDOT's editing/moderating [read: censoring] "community"(*) ALL AGREE on ONE THING:
    CENSORSHIP WORKS!

    (*)Note, the word community used often on Slashdot, this is referring to a proto communist commune.

    So, you busy little plebian proletariats, get busy, you have some censoring to do! FUN! Do the bidding of your fat, undisciplined masters who never subject themselves to peer review!

    Good job you little neo-commies. Don't want to hear the other side, shoot the fucker in the head as an ENEMY OF THE STATE [In this case anyone who seeks to improve the sad state of /.].

    I have a Gun and the Constitution [Not the urinated-on pissed-on hacked fucked up one WashingTOON thinks exists, I mean the real one, with Jefferson and Madison at my side], please, give me an excuse to use them both.

    A few haikus to commemorate the sucktitude:
    Crack Pipe Moderators
    Crack smoke wafts though air
    Dumb shit moderator!
    Try to suck less, please

    The Humorless Moderator
    Crack smoke wafts through air
    Humorless moderator!
    Why do you hate me?

    The Proletariat
    Slashdotting Commie
    Moderator fears new idea!
    Censor him quickly

    The reason China blocked Slashdot is that when Jiang Xemin saw at how good "The Editors" at Slashdot are at suppressing the community, he knew that if more of his party members saw this degree of suppressive efficacy, he would be deposed, for the good of the people, of course, in favor of Rob Malda as the all new supreme dictator and premier of China.

    It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. - Sir Winston Churchill (Especially when your democratic peers twist democracy into a reason commit censorship, to squash dissenting or unpopular opinions, and refer to them as trolls, flaimbait overrated or offtopic when they aren't any of the said)

    The reason there are two senators for each state is so that one can be the designated driver. - Jay Leno.

    The Constitution poses no threat to our current form of government. (Death to those who defile the root documents of a free nation to make economic freedom Supercede Freedom! Freedom First! Free market Second!)

    Occam's Razor "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily." "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate" "Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora" "Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem" Translation: " "Simple explanations are preferred to complex ones" Modern fucking translation "JUST DO IT."

    Reading Slashdot at anything above -1 is like trying to put a shit filter on your ass.

    Get busy moderating this down, you little pack of obedient prefects of the corrupt state! You are the vanguards of purity, and dissent is not allowed!

  53. From the guys that call their chips thunderbirds, by KlausB · · Score: 1

    ... I would have expected tail fins measuring a little bit more than a measly 10nm !

  54. 1/10 meter chip. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'The gate of the transistor ... measures 10 nanometers, or 10 billionths of a meter.' The article goes on to suggest that this may lead to a 1 billion transistor chip."
    Does this mean the new chip would be 1/10th of a meter. Man, I thought chip size would shrink with time :(

  55. Unit Conversion by antis0c · · Score: 2

    10 Nanometer you say? Whats that in Thickness of Human Hair?

    --

    ..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
  56. Re:I'm confused - gay karma whore. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    And were OFF!

    The mental midget comes flying out of the pink corner with a gay attempt at a full-ass-nelson!

    Combatant for justice quickly dodges Raul's homo attack.

    Raul, liking the fact his pink wrestling bikini is now wedged up his ass, reckons he can beat the superior fighter against retardation on /.

    Raul, prances around the ring like a light-on-your-feet homosexual, trying to elicit some response from the crown. A deluge of eggs and tomatoes quickly make this gay snark realize he needs to reach down in his belly, past the pond of cum his gay lover just squirted in his mouth, and reach down deep for the strength to beat the FREEDOM from moronacy on /.!

    He does a flying butt-plug drop kick, and FREEDOM from moronacy on /. puts the smack down, he breaks a chair over his head, and beats the gay Raul within an inch of his life.

    Of course, this being ./, the news reports Raul won, and marks any and all reports that are true, reporting FREEDOM from moronacy on /. WON, are squelched - marked as troll, or flame bait. (More like flamer bait)

    Raul still feels good. He is battered, and bruised. But he gets to go home to daddy. And all his gay friends tell him he is a superstar, and that was just wonderful.

    But Raul, the rest of the world KNOWS you are a fag, and you can pretend its normal, but its not. You are a mental midget, cum-licking asshole rimmer.

  57. moving away from binary? by AntiGenX · · Score: 1
    Oh wow! So three gates on a transistor! Now we can move past binary onto trinary. This will invalidate lots of old code, but I'm sure they can emulate! Of course Microsoft has been running trinary in Windows for years. The three states are ON, OFF, and CHOKE.

    The ultimate system, in my opinion, would use a multistate transistor with ON, OFF, and a dimmer function for everything in between.

    1. Re:moving away from binary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about?!

      With two gates, Windows would be doing quaternary (ON, OFF, CHOKE, CRASH)!

      With 3 gates, Windows could be doing octonary (ON, OFF, CHOKE, CRAWL, CRASH, INVALIDATE, GPF, and PERFORM - now of course the last one is disabled)!

      Windows using a "Dimmer" Transistor? That's a pretty "grey" area... too many choices between black and white. Windows would surely invoke the GPF function if it couldn't "decide".

    2. Re:moving away from binary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There always has been three states: on, off, high impediance. or for the inteligent impaired: 1,0,'Z'

    3. Re:moving away from binary? by ShawnX · · Score: 1

      There is, it's called the transcapaciter. I heard about this a few years ago on Art Bells radio program. There might be a patent on it. Basically it was a device that measured 1 and 0 and then the signals inbetween. Neet stuff but I don't know how it could be used. - ShawnX Posted from my blackberry =)

      --
      Everyone wants a Tux in their life.
  58. It's been done. by juggleme · · Score: 1

    Check out the reviews of the 2400/2600+. A lot will actually overclock to ~2.5 GHz now. They've got headroom again. Get over it.

    1. Re:It's been done. by i+am+fishhead · · Score: 1

      Bah! An Athlon 2600+ can't stand up to my 666Mhz Int-hell Pentagram 3. It has UNHOLY power! (Ypu can even sell your soul to the chip to get 100% branch prediction accuracy)

  59. Spam by billd · · Score: 1

    Is there a preference setting where I can filter out total bullshit rants posted by Anonymous Cowards?

    --

    -----

    For great justice!

  60. Re: SPAM FILTER. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Hey, write an inline proxy, and filter the HTML inline yourself. Oh, I forgot, you are too fucking stupid to do that. Why don't YOU come up with an expert system to filter out "crap"?

    You see, asshole, since "opinions" are SUBJECTIVE, "crap" is subjctive. I happen to fing that rant more true than not, and I would want the said filter to remove YOUR shit.

    See, thats why choice is imperative. if you dont like it, dont look, much less reply to it. IDIOT.

    Is there a button I can press to kill communist shitheads like yourself?

    Is there a preference to remove fucktards?

  61. Re: SPAM FILTER. by Inthewire · · Score: 1

    Bless you, AC. I love reading at -1. I like the idea of deciding for myself what is interesting and what is not.

    --


    Writers imply. Readers infer.
  62. You say they make the same product ... by beer_maker · · Score: 1
    So how come Intel is demonstrating 4.1GHz processors (even overclocking them to 4.7GHz!) while AMD hasn't even broken the 2GHz mark?

    --
    Hmmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
    1. Re:You say they make the same product ... by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 2

      Because AMD isn't like that. They're a very "show me the money" type company: look when the new Thoroughbread Rev B came out. Little fanfare, it just happened.

      Now if Intel were actually shipping 4.1GHZ CPUs, I might be impressed. Remember that they can probably only maintain this frequency with hand-picked CPUs and components, watercooling (posibly peltier as well), large fans, etc. It's just not reasonable so far.

    2. Re:You say they make the same product ... by numark · · Score: 2, Insightful

      AMD's never really played the bandwidth game. The issue with Pentium IV's is that the high gigahertz readings they have are quite misleading. For one, they can do far less work during each cycle. They may have more cycles, but the effect is lessened in that the AMDs can do far much more work per individual cycle. Second, the cache is much worse in the Pentium IV's. They have inclusive caches, which because of their design cause the chip to have to go to much-slower memory more often than the exclusive cache designs of the AMD Athlon processors.

      Plus, you've got to remember that these "fast" Pentium IV's are months away from even being introduced on paper. By that time the comparably-performing Hammers should be out, running both 32 and 64-bit applications and from what I hear quite fast as well. Basically, the difference is this: Intel caters to the average Joe who thinks bigger numbers are better, while AMD takes much more care to ensure that their chips run at a fast, reliable speed that rivals that of higher-rated Pentium IV's.

      --
      Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
    3. Re:You say they make the same product ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STUPID fuckity fuck head. as mentioned, the Thouroughbred B version Athlon 2600+ is ALREADY past the 2ghz mark.

      stupid fuckity fuck fuck.

    4. Re:You say they make the same product ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad you still can't buy anything faster than a 2200+ even though the 2400+ and 2600+ were announced weeks ago.

  63. 3D by peter303 · · Score: 2

    billion = 32K x 32K (2D) 32 trillion = 32K x 32K x 32K (3D)

  64. The Real Question by Alethes · · Score: 1

    The article goes on to suggest that this may lead to a 1 billion transistor chip.

    Does it require a radiator to stay cool?

  65. Re:I'm confused - humor attempt = shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess it's good that you weren't then, because I don't think you could haul a worse joke out of your ass without help.

  66. A 10-meter chip? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The gate of the transistor . . .measures . . . 10 billionths of a meter. The article goes on to suggest that this may lead to a 1 billion transistor chip."

    So then, wouldn't the chip need to be at least 10 meters across? (10E-9 * 1E9)

  67. hee hee by Sneftel · · Score: 1

    It's rather funny to watch AMD and Intel battle it out in the R&D departments, arguing over whose silicon dick is smaller.

    --
    The opinions stated herein do not necessarily represent those of anybody at all. Deal with it.
  68. Wow, can you imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a beowolf cluster of these?

  69. READ AT 0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You get the AC's with something good to say, but cut out a lot of bullshit rants and crappy trolls. Have fun.

    1. Re:READ AT 0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      How about, fuck off an die you mediocritomaton.

      You snarky bullshit artist.

  70. Re:Same. IBM inside AMD label outside by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IBM makes the chips for amd,thats how amd lowers
    there cost.outsourceing fabrication.

  71. ILSI? by SanLouBlues · · Score: 2

    Insanely Large Scale Intergrated Circuits?

  72. Re:ILSI?its RLSI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ridiculously Large Scale Integration

  73. Re:Billionth? Blame the French by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

    The two naming conventions were in fact devised at different times by the Frenchmen Chuquet (1B=10e12) and De la Roche (1B=10e9). The De la Roche system was in vogue at the time of the revolutionary war (or the colonial rebellion take your pick) and that usage has remained current in America ever since.

    This is similar to the changed spelling and pronounciation of aluminum (=> aluminium) in an attempt to systematize its naming. This only occured after the industrial revolution made the once rare metal commonplace and hence the original naming has been preserved in America.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.