Intel Promises Revolutionary 22nm Technology

Status
Not open for further replies.

kewlx

Distinguished
Mar 3, 2010
99
0
18,630
0
hmm my 920 is still good at 3.6Ghz with 12 GB's of 777-18 1456mhz should last me quite awhile.. though my HD 5870 will need to be bumped up to 7K series to do BF3 at a good FPS :D but I can't wait to upgrade when I do.. probably will be 16 physical core and 32 logical cores at 5 Ghz stock with ddr4 out and about ^_^..
 

decrypted

Distinguished
Apr 16, 2010
59
0
18,630
0
That's some serious money just for R&D. Once Graphene kicks in, developed will feel like a full on sprint compared to the running pace it is now. Fun times ahead... :D
 

stevo777

Distinguished
Jan 8, 2008
247
0
18,680
0
"We don't hear Intel using this word very often and if it does, then there is usually a good reason why it does."

What are you talking about--they always say that and it's mostly hype. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure it will be good stuff, but don't blow it out of proportion. Dump the x86--then I'll be impressed.
 

FloKid

Distinguished
Aug 2, 2006
416
0
18,780
0
Maybe finally we'll be drinking out of round cups, but maybe if Starbucks makes hexagon ones we won't think the games today are just games :
 

pelov

Distinguished
Jan 6, 2011
423
0
18,810
15
to be fair, AMD has 28nm planned for 2012, but intel is moving full speed ahead.

Should be very interesting to see just how much power CPU's chew up in 4-5 years, nevermind the blistering performance =D
 

Flameout

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2009
105
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]stevo777[/nom]"We don't hear Intel using this word very often and if it does, then there is usually a good reason why it does."What are you talking about--they always say that and it's mostly hype. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure it will be good stuff, but don't blow it out of proportion. Dump the x86--then I'll be impressed.[/citation]
+1
 

K2N hater

Distinguished
Sep 15, 2009
617
0
18,980
0
Revolutionary profits, I see. I bet the final products won't be any faster than the current except for those willing to spend a grand.
 
Funny thing is, it doesn't matter what they bring to the table if current gen can keep up with the work.

Intel better focus on faster software development for those "technologies" they mention, to actually see the light of day.

Why not give a hand to game developers so they actually USE those features, to core programs (browsers, Open/LibreOffice, for instance) that people use on a daily basis. I know it's a delicate balance, but if they don't shift and move the waters, the fish are gonna move to another pound (ARM is getting so close to satisfy the "core" needs I'm telling).

Wake up Intel, and also AMD.

Cheers!
 
G

Guest

Guest
Wait a second, Ivy Bridge is suppose to just be Sandy bridge on a 22nm die. Intel must be talking about the next generation 22nm.
 

11796pcs

Distinguished
Jan 3, 2011
608
0
18,990
4
You know as much as I like that Intel is moving forward with bigger and better, frankly right now I would rather be AMD. Whoa, dude AMD sucks you may say but look at the facts and the money. Currently mobile and low-power tablets/netbooks are the rage- you don't see the news talking about the release of Sandy Bridge you see them talking about the release of the iPad. Most people won't spend the money on an i7- they'll spend money on mobile tablets that they can show off so they can say I'm better than you because I have the latest overpriced peice-of-crap. AMD capitalizes in this specific area. Sure their high-end processors are two-gens behind but look at their mobile/low-power division where the true money is at (aka brain-dead consumers). They have fantastic APUs out that murder Atom/nVidia combos and they're getting better every day. Sure it's nice to have the faster processors but most people don't know what an i5 is (most would probably guess it's from Apple). Wake up and smell the coffee Intel- the world doesn't want boxy towers anymore they want stylish and mobile even at a huge sacrifice in performance (all they're doing is playing Angry Birds anyway). The company that is able to take this sector of the market wil be the true victor even if they are five-generations behind in high-end CPUs.
 

burnley14

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
682
0
18,990
3
Awful lot of Intel hate going on here.
Personally, I love Intel for constantly pushing the envelope on tech and bringing out new stuff way before anyone else could. If it weren't for Intel, AMD would still be at 90nm manufacturing. Nor would they have put CPU and GPU on the same silicon like Intel. They simply aren't innovative, even if they are cheaper. But a slightly higher price tag is the price you pay to fund innovation at its finest (i.e. Intel's R&D budget).
 

znegval

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2009
99
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]burnley14[/nom]Nor would they have put CPU and GPU on the same silicon like Intel. They simply aren't innovative, even if they are cheaper. But a slightly higher price tag is the price you pay to fund innovation at its finest (i.e. Intel's R&D budget).[/citation]

What are you talking about? AMD came up with this concept. Intel just made a half-assed product that kind of look like it and released faster. Intel doesn't really have CPU+GPU, they just glued both next to each other.
 
G

Guest

Guest
@burnley14

"....Nor would they have put CPU and GPU on the same silicon like Intel"

what are you smoking, fusion was in the works well before intel decided they would try the same, intel got there faster because they got a ridiculous R&D budget and yet still managed to produce the mess that is GMA, pretty sure intel was pushing the tech envelope just before sledgehammer came along too, in fact they were so innovative they produced the first 64bit CPU right, and the first chip with L2 on die cache too right, excellent innovation there
 

alikum

Distinguished
Nov 28, 2008
674
0
19,010
5
@burnley14
You sure are ignorant.
It was really AMD's idea of having an on-die GPU when they bought over ATI to bring fusion products to the market.
If it weren't for AMD, you'd probably be paying for $400 for your i5 2500 and well above $1000 for your i7 2600.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS