Intel touts 45nm technology, upcoming architectures

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Presenting at the Intel Developer Forum in San Francisco on Tuesday, Intel boss Paul Otellini said the chipmaker plans to introduce new micro-architectures about every 2 years and remains on track to debut its first 45nm products during the second half of 2007.



45nm technology remains on track



Performance and energy efficiency "all start with the transistor" Otellini said, describing Intel's legacy of advancing Moore's Law and its industry-leading silicon technology and manufacturing capability.



Intel was the first to implement advanced 65nm silicon manufacturing technology in 2005, integrating power-saving features into the process that were critical to delivering power-efficiency at the transistor level. Otellini said the company is now officially shipping the majority of its processors on 65nm, before any other company had even shipped a single production unit.



Looking ahead, Intel's next-generation 45nm technology is on track for production in the second half of 2007 as planned, and Otellini disclosed for the first time that the company has fifteen 45nm products already in development across desktop, mobile, and enterprise segments.



The first of the 45nm products is on track to complete its design in the fourth quarter of this year, he said, adding that the company sports an extensive 45-nm factory network with more than 500,000 square feet of clean room space and more than $9 billion invested.



Construction of Intel Fab 32 in Arizon -- Clean Room Completed



Nehalem and Gesher architectures



Otellini estimated that the "cadence" of these manufacturing process technologies which follow Moore's Law, coupled with Intel's plans to introduce new micro-architectures about every 2 years, will result in significant performance-per-watt improvement over today's Core micro-architecture products by 2010.



He showed a chart that mapped out new micro-architectures coming in 2008 (code-named Nehalem and targeted at 45nm) followed by another in 2010 (code-named Gesher and targeted at 32nm). These new micro architectures will be developed by separate teams working in parallel, and targeted for intersection with specific future process technologies, he said.



Construction of Intel Fab 28 in Israel



"By the end of the decade we will deliver a 300 percent increase in performance per watt over today's processors," said Otellini. "This improved power and performance will enable developers and manufacturers to develop systems with incredibly exciting new capabilities."



To demonstrate how Moore's Law will continue well into the future with amazing potential, the Intel chief showed a new research prototype processor that has 80 floating point cores on a single die. The tiny silicon die on this experimental chip, just 300mm², is capable of achieving a Teraflop of performance, or 1 trillion floating point operations per second. He contrasted this with Intel's historic breakthrough 11 years ago with the world's first Teraflop supercomputer, a massive machine powered by nearly 10,000 Pentium Pro processors in more than 85 large cabinets occupying about 2,000 square feet.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 91
    Now im beginning to feel that i shouldnt have ordered my new Macbook Pro and wait for the teraflop mac...



    hahaha
  • Reply 2 of 91
    Why hasn't Apple integrated this 80-core teraflop chip into their MacBook Pro's yet? If I don't see this 80 core Mac soon, I'm definitely going to purchase another brand's laptop just because of the processor, willfully ignorant of the fact that the "slower" Mac still performs all of my computing tasks quicker than the alternative machine.
  • Reply 3 of 91
    I think I'm going to hold out on Mac purchases until Gesher is here. Mmmmm mmmmm 32mm mulicore goodness. And you only have to wait 3-4 yrs.
  • Reply 4 of 91
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Apple is DOOMED!!



  • Reply 5 of 91
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 32,959member
    Intel is so far ahead of AMD in process technology it's not funny.



    AMD has to depend on others for help. Intel doesn't.
  • Reply 6 of 91
    What can I say? BRAVO!!!!!







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bdj21ya


    Why hasn't Apple integrated this 80-core teraflop chip into their MacBook Pro's yet? If I don't see this 80 core Mac soon, I'm definitely going to purchase another brand's laptop just because of the processor, willfully ignorant of the fact that the "slower" Mac still performs all of my computing tasks quicker than the alternative machine.



  • Reply 7 of 91
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmurchison


    I think I'm going to hold out on Mac purchases until Gesher is here. Mmmmm mmmmm 32mm mulicore goodness. And you only have to wait 3-4 yrs.



    Ironically, that is probably when I will be in need of a new machine. SWEET!!!
  • Reply 8 of 91
    Eagerly awaiting the IA64B overlords.
  • Reply 9 of 91
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross


    Intel is so far ahead of AMD in process technology it's not funny.



    AMD has to depend on others for help. Intel doesn't.



    What makes me worried about Intel's future is not the process technology or even the performance of the processors. It's the fact that AMD is tying multiple companies to its in house developed standards (Torrenza, PPC on Socket F, if it's true) and Intel is left behind. I don't think Intel carries sufficent weight now to stand against the combined weight of AMD, ATi and IBM. I hope I'm wrong.
  • Reply 10 of 91
    You're wrong.
  • Reply 11 of 91
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zandros


    It's the fact that AMD is tying multiple companies to its in house developed standards (Torrenza, PPC on Socket F, if it's true)



    PPC on Socket F? Where did you hear that? That sounds interesting, but I don't remember multiple architectures using the same processor pin-out complementing each other. The Athlon's EV6 bus was supposed to allow shared chipset development with the Alpha, but that never materialized, none of the Alpha's chipsets were used with Athlons that I remember, and the Athlon's chipsets simply weren't good enough for Alpha.
  • Reply 12 of 91
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM


    PPC on Socket F? Where did you hear that? That sounds interesting, but I don't remember multiple architectures using the same processor pin-out complementing each other. The Athlon's EV6 bus was supposed to allow shared chipset development with the Alpha, but that never materialized, none of the Alpha's chipsets were used with Athlons that I remember, and the Athlon's chipsets simply weren't good enough for Alpha.



    Sorry, forgot to check the source of the article. Allegedly, it was Informationweek and the Register. Makes it somewhat less likely. (Not PPC by the way, should have been POWER7...)



    @ Programmer: Thank you.
  • Reply 13 of 91
    How is 300mm^2 tiny? Well, in comparison to a 2000 sf room, yeah, but 300mm^2 is not small.



  • Reply 14 of 91
    Well the Cell is 221mm^2 and they are pushing that into consumer electronics devices. Plus if you have 80 cores on the die you'll get lots of chips you can sell with 79, 78, 77, 76, ... cores.
  • Reply 15 of 91
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by godrifle


    How is 300mm^2 tiny? Well, in comparison to a 2000 sf room, yeah, but 300mm^2 is not small.



    It's a little large for a typical CPU die, but that wafer being held has about 80 of them.
  • Reply 16 of 91
    Let's get all 80 of those chips connected and running. That would rock.
  • Reply 17 of 91
    These announcements make dual-core chips sound like the pentium33 in terms of being aged out.
  • Reply 18 of 91
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 32,959member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Zandros


    What makes me worried about Intel's future is not the process technology or even the performance of the processors. It's the fact that AMD is tying multiple companies to its in house developed standards (Torrenza, PPC on Socket F, if it's true) and Intel is left behind. I don't think Intel carries sufficent weight now to stand against the combined weight of AMD, ATi and IBM. I hope I'm wrong.



    I agree with Programmer on this one. You are wrong.
  • Reply 19 of 91
    So how will this increase my FPS? (frags per second)
  • Reply 20 of 91
    Intel, quit making me drool, I haven't even gotten my first x86 Mac yet and you're tantalising me with this!* When are you going to get sluggish and incompetent like Motorola and let us have one update per year which is just a few MHz on the clock?* You're making me feel weird!
Sign In or Register to comment.