Intel announces 22nm chips for 2011
By Nilay Patel 
posted Sep 22nd 2009 12:14PM
posted Sep 22nd 2009 12:14PM
posted Sep 22nd 2009 12:14PM
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Woot! I can't wait to see my Core i69's
I...I see forever.....
man amd needs to get their stuff in gear theyre still using 45nm while intels already moving to 22.
It seems so far the time my CPU contained exactly 68000 transistors... (^_^)
@jay jay:
intel is not moving to 22nm yet. 2011 is still two years away..
Good by 32nm, we hardly even knew ya!!!
@mastakilla:
Yeah, right now Intel is launching their 32nm chips....
http://www.eetindia.co.in/ART_8800584238_1800001_NT_394e6cac.HTM
2 years goes by pretty damn fast.
Impressive
Does this mean higher clock speeds yet?
I thinking they gave up on clock speeds and are look at more efficient processing of many threads.
Applications need to start coding to take advantage of multi-core processors.
There is no need for increase speed since we are still limited by the front-side bus.
kjb434, i'm pretty sure Nehalem (Core i7/i5) doesn't have a front side bus, intel did away with that. they use this QuickPath Interconnect to connect to RAM.
I was just expecting to have a 6GHz chip by now. Instead i have a quad core Phenom chip but i would have thought that seeing how multi-core processors don't have the programming support yet they would work on upping the clock speeds at the number of cores that they presently have. I figure that 22nm runs cooler with lower voltage as far as i know, so why not make it run a little faster... I want 3.6ghz back...
Correction: That's not 2.9 Billion transistors, that's a "wafter" containing countless chips which each have 2.9 billion transistors.
Higher clock speeds generate more heat, and cannot be efficiently pipelined, thus as kjb434 said they are moving towards more efficient use of parallel programming rather than ultra fast serial programming. At 6GHz you are turning off 2.9 billion transistors 6 billion times a second, that generates an immense amount of heat. CRAZY HOT!
Its been done before though.
Previously intel used a pipeline that was something like 40 operations a cycle(166ps) that was when 5GHz chips were the biggest and badest around. Then intel realized that rather than ram so many operations in each cycle, we can build multiple chips to help process the cycles. They now run a cycle with like 15 or so operations but have a mucher greater throughput overall due to the multi cores. Basically what your asking for is the days of single core high speed process to come back. Those were the good ole days.
There are rumors that Sandy Bridge, Intels' next chip(fall '10, 32nm, quadcore+IGP) will live in the high 3Ghz to low 4Ghz region.
Dow that's more of what i was talking about. Why can't progress be made on both fronts?
Will it run Crysis?
Yes, but the chip runs so cool, it would freeze on the Ice levels. Hur hur hur.
Damn it i need sleep.
it runs crysis 2
wooooooooooow
singularity is fast approaching!
Don't forget, the best kind of singularities are naked.
I'm still getting used to 65nm technology.
Well AMD is at least, that's why the world continues to snicker at them politely...
thats braw
I wish I had 2.9 billion transistors!
And then I says, "That's no transistor, that's my wife!"
Ugh.. I really do need some sleep.
You stole my name.
Transistor? I barely know her!
Dude, the eMacs were obsolete when they came out.
Poor AMD. At this rate, they'll never have a chance of catching up to Intel. Fusion better be as good as AMD believes it will be else they're gonna start bleeding money.
Nah, they're like Apple, they have fanboys that will buy their stuff no matter how bad it is.
You could replace "Apple" with any other company. They all have dedicated customers.
The key difference is AMD makes good stuff at a decent price.
Apple makes outdated stuff at an outrageous price.
I agree about the outrageous prices. The outdated crack is just plain nonsense. Yeah, maybe their video cars in their towers are outdated, but no one buys the towers (since they are overpriced) anyway. In their regular machines, they keep up to date, all the while applying a rather large price premium.
Don't worry. AMD is an IBM development partner and IBM has been developing 22nm fairly on-pace with Intel. The first processors with the technology will be IBM's server processors, but AMD will get some flavor of it somewhat thereafter. Doesn't necessarily mean they'll be able to make the chips at a profitable price point, but the technology access will be there.
Aside from being horribly wrong, Jordan, you have committed the mortal sin of feeding the trolls.
Don't underestimate the value of aesthetic appeal. Why don't I consider my eMac obselete? Partly because it looks so friggin' nice.
You know the size isn't as important as architecture, just because Intel will be using 22nm while AMD uses 32nm doesn't mean the Intel will be faster :P
AMD will be using a brand new architecture (Bulldozer) in 2011, it looks promising so far.
AMD Bulldozer vs. Intel's Ivy Bridge will be much more interesting :)
AMD affordable? me thinks you haven't shopped for a video card recently...Nvidia has had anything worth buying unless you're an AMD fanboy.
Finally... intel match, the engadget-fan crab count
mmmmmm wafer.
Maybe the mayans were predicting singularity in 2012...
You might be on to something.
Despite all the uninformed, end of the world in 2012 garbage, the fact is; the world has already ended half a dozen times according to that particular calender.
Wish I had a dollar for every transistor on that. Hell, wish i had a penny for each one.
Real copper pennies so you could melt them all down and sell them to China and make mad lootz? :D
I think it's safe to say, that it runs Crysis 10. I think it runs Crysis before it's even released.