Slashdot Mirror


AMD's Next Generation Processor Technology

Esekla writes "AMD has released info about their upcoming processor technology. The press release claims that they're producing circuits that run 30% faster than any other published benchmarks using "Fully Depleted" Silicon-on-Insulator and AMD's metal gating technology and actually has a good bit of technical detail for a press release."

61 of 320 comments (clear)

  1. Excellent... by ceswiedler · · Score: 2, Offtopic

    If nothing else, this should pump up my AMD stock.

    Does anyone know if this is press-release hype or a real breakthrough? I'm not a semiconductor expert. But my suspicion is, real breakthroughs generally don't get announced in marketing press-releases on Yahoo Finance.

    1. Re:Excellent... by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Does anyone know if this is press-release hype or a real breakthrough?

      Neither - it's incremental improvement. That's how most progress is made.

  2. Metal gates? by sleepingsquirrel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm not a process guy, so could someone explain why they're claiming metal gates are better? I was under the impresson that metal gates were more compatable with high-k gate oxides, but I didn't see any mention of non-SiO2 dielectrics. And on that note, does anyone know if AMD is trying out any low-k dielectrics for the interconnect?
    I also noticed that one of the lines in the slide said something to the effect of, "Mesa isolation was used to keep things simple". Does this mean that they just did that for the one test wafer to keep things easy, but it'll be no problem once we get the process into production? Or are we talking about something that's still many years in the future?

    1. Re:Metal gates? by Aneurysm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can imagine initially much more expensive chip,s because the chances of the chips being produced at existing plants using existing equipment is pretty slim, so new manufacturing plants will need to be built, or at a minimum modified

    2. Re:Metal gates? by FuzzyDaddy · · Score: 5, Informative
      I'm no longer in the CMOS biz, but let me take a stab at it.

      Polysilicon has been the gate material of choice because it is much easier to process. However, metal would reduce the resistance of the gate. (The gate acts like a little capacitor, and the resistance of the gate affects the amount of time it takes to charge up and discharge, which affects the switching time.) I think the processing ease of Polysilicon is lost when you don't use Silicon dioxide as the gate material - for example, if you used a high-K dielectric. I don't know if metal is inherently more compatible with high-k materials, just that it's less compatible with SiO.

      They also mention the metal gives a "tunable work function" (probably by adjusting the silicon/nickel ratio), which I would guess would change the turn on voltage of the transistor. Tuning the turn on voltage could certainly tweak up the speed a bit.

      --
      It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
    3. Re:Metal gates? by sarpedon77 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Metal gates have 4 main advantages in advanced CMOS transistors:
      (1) The gate resistance is reduced. This lowers the switching delay in some cases. Remember that the delay is proportional to the product of the resistance and capacitance (the 'RC' product).

      (2) In polysilicon gates, the free carrier density is very high (1E20 carriers per cubic cm). Even so, under high electric fields that are needed to switch a transistor, there is a small depleted layer created right at the interface of the gate and the dielectric. This effectively acts as a capacitor in series with the dielectric and increases what is called the "effective oxide thickness". This is very bad, especially when process engineers are trying extremely hard to reduce the oxide thickness. At the scales we are at now, every Angstrom counts. In metal gates, the carrier density is 1000X higher. This makes it much harder to deplete and you regain the 4 angstroms. This means either higher performance with the same gate dielectric thickness, or you can get the same performance and increase the dielectric thickness by 4A, thereby reducing the gate tunneling leakage current (and hence power) by an order of magnitude. This is a big deal.

      (3) Some high dielectric constant materials (that are candidates to replace silicon dioxide) are not very compatible with polysilicon. This could mean either thermodynamic instability or interfacial charge created that "pins" the workfunction (and affects the switching threshold voltage of the transistor)

      (4) In fully-depleted silicon on insulator (FD-SOI, or "depleted substrate transistor" in Intel parlance) transistors, the threshold voltage comes out wrong when using doped polysilicon gates. It makes the transistor either too slow or too leaky. There is a desperate need for tuning the threshold voltage by using a different workfunction which can be found in some metal gates.

      Of course, metal gates aren't without their problems. (the predecessors of today's transistors had metal gates - hence the 'M' in CMOS - Complementary METAL Oxide Semiconductor - which were replaced by polysilicon gates for processing ease.) Inability to be easily patterned, withstand high processing temperatures, reliability issues are just a few of them.

  3. mmm... more speed... by blitzoid · · Score: 3, Funny

    Let's hope that these new chips are as inexpensive as current AMD processors.

    Or at least as heat efficient! (Badum-dum psshh)

    --
    I am a filthy pirate.
    1. Re:mmm... more speed... by eechuah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you've worked with vortex tubes before (I have) you'll know that they are NOISY. That's because you have to pump air in at certain velocity/psi to get the desired cooling effect. It's useful to use as air cooling of processors (We use it in our labs), but water cooling is much better because water absorbs heat faster, and is quieter. Of course, you have problems with leak-testing, etc. All part of the usual engineering tradeoffs.

  4. If only... by Fry-kun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    if only they started *producing* those chips 30% faster...
    well, one can only hope...

    --
    Did you know that "FTW" ("for the win") is a direct translation of "Sieg Heil"?
  5. I/O Speed Please by jabbadabbadoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As a fellow /.'er has already indicated, processor speed improvements is very exiting. What I wanna see is a yearly increase of 30% on I/O speed. I'd rather have a super-fast bus and a new 50-ns-access-time storage technology than a 10 GHz processor.

    1. Re:I/O Speed Please by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Opteron already has an excellent memory subsystem and fast paths to PCI-X peripherals. Aggregate I/O and memory bandwidth in 4-way Opterons is pretty sick, and although it won't compete with insane systems from IBM and SGI, it is a lot better than anything else you can get in an $8000 box. What were you hoping for?

    2. Re:I/O Speed Please by platypus · · Score: 2, Funny

      "is very exiting"
      I meant, NOT very exiting...


      LOL, I bet you didn't mean that either.

  6. depleted silicon? by konichiwa · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wow, they must have circumvented UN Resolution 1441 in buying that depleted silicon from the depths of Niger's black market.

    WAR AGAINST AMD

    --
    Never argue with an idiot, he'll just lower you to his level and beat you with experience.
  7. for heat, go retro by krog · · Score: 3, Funny

    one (Boston) winter, I heated my dorm room quite adequately with a Sun 4/260, also using five big 2GB SCSI drives to fine-tune temperature. warm as hell.

    1. Re:for heat, go retro by GeckoFood · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, that's what AMD's press-release doesn't tell you... The new processor will generate enough heat to roast a turkey if left near the computer for more than 10-15 minutes...

      --
      Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
  8. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by ultrabot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People running serious server-side stuff can.

    And I'm not talking about Web servers, but heavy database work, HPC etc. We are evidencing an era where proprietary Unix systems are brought down from their pedestal, and having good performance figures can't hurt.

    Your mom will also like it, what with all the video&image editing and stuff.

    Why is it that every time an increase in computing performance is reported, Slashdot is full of people whining why they don't need it.

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
  9. wait just a darn minute! by Fry-kun · · Score: 2, Interesting

    this benchmark improvement thing rings a bell.
    XD

    --
    Did you know that "FTW" ("for the win") is a direct translation of "Sieg Heil"?
  10. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by Cruel+Angel · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I know I will. Not so much for myself, but in the fact that as the technology speeds up, I see more of some of my friends.

    Compile times for programs, and render times for graphics are steadily getting better, which means they finish projects faster, and have more developed social lives.

    Which brings me to an interesting question. Is this true:
    Faster CPU's = More free time for 'Working' Nerds?

    it seems to work in my circle of friends, but is it a 'universal' truth?

    --
    Two Rules For Success:
    1) Never tell people everything you know.
  11. Actual speed by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 3, Funny

    they're producing circuits that run 30% faster

    Not to worry, the next generation of Windows will no doubt be that much slower.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  12. Not at all... by gfxguy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's been my experience that people expect you to be able to do more. Work twice as fast? They want twice the output.

    I work in the 3D department of a television production studio, and the better the equipment we get, the more demanding the clients are. Often enough it's even worse - we might show a new feature we couldn't do before because the rendering times would be too long, but instead of taking 3 or 4 times the amount it would have, the new hardware brings it to 1.5 or 2 - it still takes longer, it's just that now we can do it.

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.
  13. NetBSD by KillerHamster · · Score: 2, Funny

    Has NetBSD been ported to it yet?

  14. Working together to defeat Intel by ikewillis · · Score: 4, Informative
    It's nice to see AMD, IBM, and Apple working together to defeat Intel.

    As you may or may not know, IBM originally developed Silicon-on-Insulator technology and licensed it to AMD. Here is the whitepaper: http://www-3.ibm.com/chips/bluelogic/showcase/soi/ soipaper.pdf

    This is the same technology that was used to make the Power4 processor, and will also be used to make the upcoming PPC970: http://www-916.ibm.com/press/prnews.nsf/jan/06C1F2 11F9B1C24B85256ADF006163AF

    AMD has recently built a new state-of-the-art fabrication facility in Dresden to produce the chips, known as "Fab 30": http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1773

    I hope together IBM and AMD will continue to update their manufacturing process to keep on par or perhaps once again surpass Intel.

    1. Re:Working together to defeat Intel by 4of12 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I like AMD as much as the next guy (running an 1800 XP), but I'm not sure why Intel needs to be defeated... good company, good products.

      Intel doesn't need to be defeated, just "competed".

      Intel (and every other company) simply needs to be in competition, in a hotly-contested race to produce high quality products for the lowest price in a well-informed marketplace

      Absence of competition permits, even encourages companies to produce lower quality products because they can charge high prices for them [1[PDF]][2[PDF]] and make a greater profit doing so.

      If Intel hasn't done this so much yet, then it's to their credit, but without competition, nothing will prevent it from happening in the future.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    2. Re:Working together to defeat Intel by evilviper · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, they are slightly evil... I think the Rambus Saga a while back showed that pretty well.

      They force expensive, unwanted, patented tech. on the public, that isn't any better than DDR, and through their lecinsing programs, they prevent any 3rd parties from doing so.

      I don't think Intel needs to be "defeated" per-se, but they could sure use some stronger competition, so they can't pull crap like that again, and screw over consumer.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    3. Re:Working together to defeat Intel by mrm677 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's nice to see AMD, IBM, and Apple working together to defeat Intel.

      Yes, lets all pray that Intel is defeated so that we have a different company that has a monopoly on mainstream microprocessors. Therefore, the existing competition that has driven down the cost of microprocessors, will disappear.

      Rip on them all you want, but overall, Intel has been good for the mainstream computer industry. They generally participate in standards groups and for the most part, have an open architecture. Otherwise AMD wouldn't have a compatible chip. Yes, I realize that Intel fought this and would love to have a monopoly on x86 chips. But with the way the chips have fallen (no pun intended), they don't have this monopoly.

      Intel has also generally given Linux more support than AMD has. Remember the AGP cache coherence bug on the Athlon? AMD reported the problem to Microsoft nearly immediately with a fix that appeared in Win2k SP1. However they didn't even take the time to send an e-mail to the Linux kernel mailing list and the problem wasn't discovered nor fixed for another year and a half. Anyone remember weird crashes when playing TuxRacer and an AGP card with an Athlon T-bird? I do.

      And lets not forget that Jerry Sanders, the CEO (or former CEO) of AMD, supported Microsoft in the anti-trust case.

      Like it or not, they are both businesses. However AMD is no more "friendly" than Intel is.

  15. Fully depleted of charge carriers by zptdooda · · Score: 2, Informative

    You donâ(TM)t have to worry about your current (pun intended) non-fully-depleted silicon oxide chips.

    So you donâ(TM)t need to go shopping for a lead ATX case.

    I think the full depletion increases insulation so the layer can be thinner.

    --
    Esteem isn't a zero sum game
  16. Re:With the obvious question, being why. by RumpRoast · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because: New hardware sells new computers. Johnny luser only knows that he needs more megs and gigs. If you say "exploiting the technology that we have", he will start to drool and stutter.

    --

    My Ass hurts.
  17. Makes hacking tough, don't it? by derinax · · Score: 3, Funny

    As I read this I'm thinking the whole time of the enormous, nasty globs of dusty, cold solder that make up my 1978 Commodore Pet's motherboard.

    SOI, shmeSOI. I say we get back to centimeter processes-- much easier to hack.

  18. All well and good, but... by Aardpig · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...nowadays I think that the last component of a PC which needs speeding up is the CPU. Many other components act as a brake on the real-world efficiency of systems; one particularly close to my heart is the cache size. Most computational problems which I come across are too large to fit in less than 2 Mb; therefore, on processors which have a much lower clock speed than x86 offerings, but a much larger cache, I get much better results. The Sparc III series is a good example; the clock speed is around 500Mhz (maybe higher on more recent versions), but the 4 Mb instruction cache & 4 Mb data cache (IIRC) mean that the sort of numerical problems I solve can fly. Of course, it could be argued that this is due to the superiority of the SPARC architecture over x86, but you get my point.

    I'd be interested to try out one of the new Pentium M processors (as found on Centrino platforms); I understand they have 1 Mb caches, and this may give them quite a performance boost for numerically-intenstive stuff.

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    1. Re:All well and good, but... by The_K4 · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are Xeon MP procs w/ 2 Meg Caches. I'm not positive but I believe that opteron also has a 1 Meg Cache. If your looking at doing something that high-end there ARE options out there. They just arn't cheap.

    2. Re:All well and good, but... by BenjyD · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem is that larger caches (which are good for server/high-end computational work) generally mean higher latencies (or ridiculously expensive chips *cough* Sparc *cough*), which is bad for more 'normal' performance measurements (desktop/office/gaming etc).

    3. Re:All well and good, but... by akuma(x86) · · Score: 3, Informative

      That large cache for your UltraSparc-III is off chip. This is important to note because the bandwidth you get from the off-chip caches is much lower than the bandwidth of an on-chip cache. In fact, if you read the Ultrasparc-III systems specs you'll find that the bandwidth to the cache is comparable to the bandwidth to DRAM on a relatively cheap PC (the new Intel Canterwood/Springdale chipsets have a peak DRAM bandwidth of 6.4GB/sec)

      If you need a 2MB cache you should consider a Xeon-MP which has just that. Couple this with a reasonably fast core and you should see some good performance for your application. Most x86 processors will have at least 1Mb of cache by the end of the year (Hammer, Prescott, Banias).

      As you might imagine, on-chip caches are expensive. As a rule of thumb, the closer the memory is to the processor core, the more expensive it will be.

      Your argument that SPARC is superior to x86 is weak. I've designed both kinds of processors and everything these days is basically RISC-like. The x86 code is translated into micro-ops that look like RISC. SPARC also has some stupid instructions and idioms. For example, register windows may seem like a good idea, but they really grow your register file and limit your frequency. Also, delayed branches are stupid and limit many things you can do. If I had to do another SPARC chip, I'd do some translation of my own into more efficient hardware-friendly micro-ops.

      SPARC systems are nowhere near as competive as x86 systems. Their last niche of superiority with server workloads will disappear with the proliferation of Opteron systems.

  19. Re:With the obvious question, being why. by Omegaunit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah but the fact that 'Johnny' is going nuts over the trailing decimals of a gigahertz number is what keeps the AMD's that 'I' use under 50 bucks. So I am not so sure that people in topeka buying a ton of highspeed deesktops is a bad thing.

    --
    // Empires come and go we live forever
  20. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by Doom+Ihl'+Varia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In all honesty I believe the Slashdot whining is because a lot of posters are poor college students or jobless teenagers. This means they generally cannot afford the shiny stuff. About this time last year I was running a PII-233 myself. By denouncing the great you can make the not-so-great seem better.

  21. its probably a result of by asv108 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Your 5400 rpm ata-33 hard drive. Seriously though, people put way too much emphasis on CPU and not enough of storage speed.

  22. Intel GHz War by WC+as+Kato · · Score: 2, Funny

    So how does this translate into GHz? Intel is kicking butt in the marketing arena. AMD needs to ratchet up consumer perceived speed through high GHz to battle Intel. Great technology and metal gates are optional.

    --
    --- I'm Green Hornet's sidekick not Inspector Clouseau's!
  23. Actual speed doesn't change when bloat happens. by djh101010 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've got a Computer Shopper in front of me from 1993. On the cover is a reasonably high-end system, for 1500 bucks. Today, one can buy a reasonably high-end system for 1500 bucks.

    At the time, it took a couple of minutes for windows to boot, on a 486-33. Today, it takes a couple of minutes for Windows to boot, on say a 1.6 GHz P4. Yes, it's doing a lot more, but it's taking just as long as it did a decade ago.

    1. Re:Actual speed doesn't change when bloat happens. by rabtech · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You must have a really crappy system then, because my WinXP workstation goes from power-on to logon in about 20 seconds total. That's a far cry from the 3 minute bootups of yesteryear.

      And FYI: you can build a reasonably fast system for less than $1,000, whereas a decently fast system in 1993 ran more like $1,500 - 2,000.

      You can build a more top of the line system for $2-4k these days, whereas a top of the line system in 1993 ran more like $3-6k.

      Computer people suffer from "The Good Old Days" syndrome just as much as everyone else.

      --
      Natural != (nontoxic || beneficial)
    2. Re:Actual speed doesn't change when bloat happens. by mungtor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You must have a really crappy system then, because my WinXP workstation goes from power-on to logon in about 20 seconds total. That's a far cry from the 3 minute bootups of yesteryear.

      Yeah, but how long until it actually logs in? That's a typical MS gimmick. They only measure from power on to logon prompt appearing.

      It was incredibly obvious on NT 4.0 workstations. The logon box pops up, but the TCP/IP stack isn't even up yet. You get to type your login info 45 seconds after power on, but you still can't use the machine for another 90. Longer if you have to wait for all it's system tray stuff to load (chat clients, anti-virus, etc).

  24. metal work function by sleepingsquirrel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I probably need to crack my physics books for this, but I thought the work function of a metal was the amount of energy needed to free and electron from the metal (a la, the photo-electric effect). So I don't see how that could possibly have an affect on the transistor action. Any physics students out there?

  25. Re:I like this.. by The_K4 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Intel getting smacked around? I think it's a pretty even day, afterall intel announced More Advanced Triple-Gate Transistor Design One Step Closer to Production today.

  26. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by Surt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are a lot of people who would love more CPU speed.

    My dad is getting into editing my and my sister's childhood videos. His user experience would probably gain substantially in quality up to a 20 to 50 ghz cpu speed.

    I plan to play Doom III, and have every reason to believe that there will be significant improvements to that experience up to 10 ghz at least.

    I have written a number of test applications in the scientific computing arena for which insufficient CPU time is available to even consider doing an actual run yet. There are a _lot_ of pretty interesting things that will come down to the end user desktop from the scientific computing arena once home users have access to systems roughly 10,000 times as fast as todays.

    Bottom line: there are a lot of people and a lot of applications that want much faster CPUs.

    --
    "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  27. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by ctr2sprt · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Gamers and people who use serious business apps can tell the difference. Ever ripped something to XVID on your computer? You'd notice the difference there if you had. On your 800MHz system you'd be looking at probably 12 hours for the whole movie, on your 1.6GHz system that might shrink to 7 hours. So it moves from an all-day project to one that can be done overnight or while you're at work. I'd consider that a noticeable improvement.

    But getting away from the made-up benchmark, everybody in the computer industry is targeting those two groups right now: big servers and gamers. Those are the only two places where the industry actually makes any money. Gamers are the idiots who will pay $500 to get 10fps more in Quake, and businesses can afford to spend $50k (or more) on a single computer.

    This shouldn't surprise anyone, though, because it's the way technology usually works. One or two interested groups spend obscene amounts of money on something that nobody else cares about. They make incredible advances, which go largely unnoticed, and then five years later people start seeing ways to apply the "useless" technology to all sorts of different things. The space program would be a good example of this. All sorts of objects we use every day owe their existence to the space program, which people continue to criticize as a waste of money. Sure, maybe the space shuttle doesn't do me any direct good, but the technology we came up with in building it sure does. The processor race works in a similar way. As CPUs get faster, software can add more and more useful features without impacting the performance of existing ones. Of course, some of those features are an annoying waste, but we still get a few good ones out of it.

  28. You learn something new every day... by sleepingsquirrel · · Score: 3, Informative
    It looks like the short answer is that the poly doesn't get as many dopant ions down close to the gate oxide, which results in an effective reduction of oxide thickness. Therefore, if the poly is replaced by SiN there will be metal all the way down to the oxide and the electric fields will be higher, which means a better transistor. Two good papers...

    Dopant profile and gate geometric effects on polysilicon gate
    Gate Length Dependent Polysilicon Depletion Effects

    Also EETimes has another interesting article with more information about AMD's presentation at the 2003 Symposium on VLSI Technology in Kyoto, Japan.

  29. Plastic Suregeon's Nightmare by Shriek · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nice to see AMD working to be innovative.
    On the other hand, some of the terminology used sounds like they came straight from a bad breast implant procedure.

    "fully-depleted Silicon-on-Insulator"

    Another term for "Your artificial knockers have sprung a leak"

    "Strained-Silicon"

    Another term for "God, those are humongous Jugs!"

  30. Larry the Cow from Gentoo says... by frankjr · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...now it'll only take half a day!!!

    Disclaimer: I use Gentoo

  31. Re:translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    join #trolls on SlashNet to practice your trolls without worry of pesky ops banning you

  32. Go buy a DV camcorder by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And do some video editing (esp. compressing it to MPEG-2 or DivX)

    You'll change your tune.

    With some of the more advanced video compression algorithms (DivX for example - Yes it has legit uses, great for distributing home videos to relatives.), a 10% increase in CPU speed can mean an hour or two off of your compression time.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  33. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In all honesty I believe the Slashdot whining is because a lot of posters are poor college students or jobless teenagers. This means they generally cannot afford the shiny stuff. About this time last year I was running a PII-233 myself. By denouncing the great you can make the not-so-great seem better.

    I have said this before, and I will said it again. I'm a professional software developer. I work on high-end 3D games, and I have a penchant for working with large, high-level languages that so many programmers put down as "too slow," such as Lisp, when I can. When I had an 866MHz Pentium III, wow, that was my dream machine. It felt like I had infinite processor cycles. If something ever felt a little sluggish, it was because I did something dumb and a little algorithmic tweaking made it go away. I never felt the need for more speed. Ever. Seriously. And now I have a P4 with 3x the clock speed (which I have for reasons other than the old PC not being fast enough).

    The "gotta have more speed" issues come down to three major things:

    1. Certain very specific tasks eat up all the processor power you can throw at them, such as high-end scientific numerical work (think: systems of tens of thousands of equations) and video compression. Both of these are specific enough that they shouldn't be driving general, across-the-board, desktop CPU development. Ideally, video compression should be done via coprocessor, just as drawing texture mapped triangles is. If we didn't have GPUs like those from nVidia and ATI, we'd need CPUs clocked at 100GHz in order to achieve the same results.

    2. Some things are slow, but they often come down to really poor design or have nothing to do with processor speed. Boot time, for example. Or sometimes you hit Help in a giant program like Quark or Maya and there's a substantially long period before the help shows up. That's not a processor bottleneck; that's another program being paged in, maybe even the Java runtime stuff to support it, and then a monstrous index of data being loaded. But people see things like this and immediately think the processor is too slow.

    3. There are certain outdated--IMO--activities that some people engage in which are fundamentally flawed, and hence slow. A good example is building monstrous applications using C++. C++ doesn't have formal support for separately compiled modules, so each one is compiled independently, you need an ugly make system to sort out the dependencies, and then they all get thrown into a massive link step at the end. People who write code with Delphi don't have this problem; compile time is effectively zero for most projects. Ditto for Lisp or Python. C++ is a necessary language, but again it shouldn't be the impetus for processor upgrades.

    Thanks for reading.

  34. Intel vs AMD by nepheles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's about time that AMD got some recognition for their work, and, more specifically, their R&D. 3DNow! was miles ahead of MMX, and the Athlon was vastly superior to the P3. The AthlonXP in turn beats the P4, Mhz for Mhz. The widespread opinion is that AMD processors are the poor-man's Intel. "Good, but not as good". Hopefully the new Opertron (it will be amazing if the Itanium does nearly as well in the 64-bit marked) and announcements like this will help redress the balance. And show that marketing budget isn't a measure of CPU quality.

    --
    ((lambda x ((x))) (lambda x ((x))))
  35. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by evilviper · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Why is it that every time an increase in computing performance is reported, Slashdot is full of people whining why they don't need it.

    I don't think /.ers are completely unjustified there... It certainly seems that most computer technology is seriously lagging behind the processor (RAM being an exception).

    The PCI slots that were on 486s are the same ones that come with your bright and shinny 3GHz AMD processor... That is certainly a serious imbalance, and it is very strange that tech companies have not really stepped-up to do something about it. Even now, there are some faster buses, but you just don't see them in regular computers.
    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  36. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by arjun · · Score: 5, Funny

    you are not running gentoo. now are you ?

  37. Phaeton Sez by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Many mention that processor speeds are irrelevant these days, because there are so many other bottlenecks in the system. I will agree that we should leave processors alone for now and work on the other issues to see any real gains.

    Unfortunately, the other industries are market driven, and there are too many people who stroke off to Overclocker Weekly centerfolds of the Latest Greatest Processor(tm).

    What we *really* need, is to completely pitch the entire x86 platform and start over from scratch. You all realise that x86 is just kludge on top of kludge on top of kludge, right?

    A brand new, well-thought out 64-bit design with either SCSI or SATA, immensely fast busses and all that rot. Of course, that'll never happen, all because of $$. They would only be able to sell that system to the computer knowledgeable, which (as we know) comprises a small percentage of the market.

    The rest are just duped robots that respond to marketing.

  38. 30% faster circuits, "hmmm..." says marketing by J.+Patrick+Graves · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "hmmm..., if the Athlon XP 3200+ actually operates at 2.2Ghz, then, assuming the new chips start at 2.2 Ghz, we can market them as 3200 * 130% or 4160. Heck, just round it up to 4200+ "

  39. Faster CPUs are a huge benefit. by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Without modern CPUs, home video editing would not be practical (and hence the market for DV camcorders would be much smaller.)

    You obviously haven't tried compressing 2 hours of video into DVD-quality MPEG-2, let alone trying to compress it into DivX to send home videos to some relatives.

    Would we really need more than 800 MHz on a home computer? I have a 1.7 GHz P4 laptop, and a 1.1 GHz Athlon. Upgrading to a Barton 3000+ (2 GHz or so actual clockrate, but much more efficient per clock than my current TBird) would take my 14-hour encoding jobs down to 7 hours. A difference between taking most of the day and running while I sleep.

    And reencoding 1080i HDTV recordings into a more managable size... yikes... I've had 24 hour encoding jobs before.

    So my suggestion: Go buy a DV camcorder, or an HDTV tuner card. I guarantee you you'll be desperate to upgrade that poke-ass 800 MHz machine in under two weeks.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  40. Clear up some misconceptions by siskbc · · Score: 4, Informative

    You're quite right, you can't change the work function of a pure metal - but if you have a blend of materials, they will have to equilibrate, as the energies of the electrons in one material will have higher energies than the electrons in the other. Therefore, electrons will move from one material to the other like water flowing downhill, until the average energies of the electrons in the material are uniform between domains (or atoms) of the different materials. This yields a single Fermi level, which is described as the average energy of the electrons in the material. By varying the quantities of the materials (here, nickel and silicon), you can change the fermi level of the material, thereby changing the work function of the material. So, while you can't change the work function of a pure metal (you'd have to apply an impossibly obscene amount of charge to do so), you can make different blends.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  41. Re:YES, I could use 1000X more processor speed by BigBadBri · · Score: 2, Funny
    remind me that I mis-placed my car keys

    I think you might be better off with a girlfriend

    Oh, wait, this is /.

    Silly me.

    --
    oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
  42. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by FlashHamster · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Your mom will also like it, what with all the video&image editing and stuff.
    This leads to an continously overlooked aspect from the usual geeky /. crowd: Increasing CPU/system performance gradually enables new approaches to simple (opposed to video-editing, 3D, server etc.) tasks.

    Example:
    Two weeks ago I wanted to design some nice buttons for my music playing application. As my 2D "painting" skills are limited, I modeled a very nice "base" image with povray, laying indivdual button elements over it in Gimp later.
    While there may be more suited applications for button design I am very pleased with the result and I would neither have worked this way if working with Povray/Gimp were not smooth enough nor would I have achieved the same result with tools suited less to my skill set.
    Going back just two generations of my computer equipment, still powerful enough for other common tasks, the end result would have been worse.
  43. Re:Defeat Intel by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Buy an NForce2 motherboard from Asus or Abit or Shuttle and you'll change your tune very quickly.

    1: AMD Athlons are cooler than P4s that perform equivalently. The old "AMD is hot" mantra came from PIII vs Thunderbird. It's not true any more.

    2: Via is hardely "Mickey Mouse". How about ATI or NVIDIA? Asus? Abit? Shuttle? Chaintech? Aopen? Are they all "Mickey Mouse" too? You can buy an Athlon motherboard from every major manufacturer except Intel.

    3: The Athlon is not crap. It is STILL one of the highest performing architectures on the block. The new XP3200+ beats the P4 3.06 in quite a few tests. It can't quite match the new Canterwood chipset with the P4 3.0C GHz, though.

    4: Millions of Athlon systems all over the world have been operating flawlessly for years. Andnadtech, for one, uses Athlons in their servers. HardOCP did, but they switched to Opteron recently. Your reliability may suck. That is the exception, not the rule.

    Your post is a troll. And I have three Athlon systems that have been operating fine for years.

  44. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by shellbeach · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Often times I have to start some work and leave my computer alone since I can't even use a simple text editor like 'vi' because my system doesn't have the resources.

    nice -n 19 [insert big CPU intensive task here]?

  45. Re:Will anyone notice the speed? by kasperd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My webservers see serious cpu loads

    Do you know how much time your CPU spends computing and how much it spends waiting for data to arrive from your RAM?

    --

    Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?