Don't expect 2.5Ghz any time soon
According to this article IBM only projected 2.5Ghz when the die is shrunk to 90nm:
<a href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2131244,00.html" target="_blank">http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2131244,00.html</a>
<a href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2131244,00.html" target="_blank">http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2131244,00.html</a>
Comments
[quote]
Even at the lower end of its range, 1.8GHz, the upcoming chip will run nearly twice as fast as IBM's quickest existing PowerPC chip, the 1GHz 750FX.<hr></blockquote>
Looks like it wont be as blazing fast as we think..
Unless they mean that 1.8 Ghz = almost twice as fast as 1.0 Ghz, even though they are two diffrent processors...
Lets hope so...
<a href="http://www.macbidouille.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2003-03-10#4956" target="_blank">http://www.macbidouille.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2003-03-10#4956</a>
Sounds like an overclickers dream CPU.
<strong>According to this article IBM only projected 2.5Ghz when the die is shrunk to 90nm:
<a href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2131244,00.html" target="_blank">http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2131244,00.html</a></strong><hr></blockquote>
Your statement is exactly correct: IBM only projected 2.5 GHz...
Some designs underachieve, some designs overachieve. Few actually meet the projections exactly. And if you're only talking about clock rate then it is correct to say "the 1.8 GHz chip will run nearly twice as fast as ... the 1 GHz 750FX". This does not say it will "perform nearly twice as well", or "its SPECmarks are almost double".