[citation][nom]I_know_im_right_thanks[/nom]OK noobs, specifically Corporate Goon, Geoffs, and anyone else who didn't believe me:A comparison of 90nm Windsor and 45nm Deneb:Windsor 219mm2 243million transistorsDeneb 258mm2 758million transistors//normalizing the die size difference219/258 = 0.8488372090.848837209 * 758million = 643.2million//computing the difference in density643.2million / 243million = 2.647813188Much closer to 2x, isn't it? Apology accepted.[/citation]No apology was offered! I tried to be polite about this, but since you want to get nasty....
You !@#$%#$% moron, those two CPUs are different architectures with different amounts of L1/L2 cache and other significant differences. Not all transistors are the same size, nor do they scale exactly the same way. Those used for logic circuits vs those used for cache memory vs those used for power and clock distribution are all different sizes.
For an clear example of that, look at these two Intel Core 2 Duo CPUs.
65nm E4400, 167M transistors, 111 sq mm die
45nm E8600, 410M transistors, 107 sq mm die
More than 2x as many transistors on a slightly smaller die, and that's only going from 65nm to 45nm. You can't compare two different architectures on die size and transistor count alone! Find a chip that was scaled from one feature size to the next smaller WITHOUT changing it's number of processing units, cores, cache sizes, or adding or removing other features, and you'll see that for a 30% reduction in "feature size", you get about a 50% reduction in area.
PS: All the same, your strawman argument doesn't begin to explain Mr. NvidiaCEO's claim...
I wasn't trying to explain his 570x comment, just verify that the calculations "spanky deluxe" used are in fact correct. I never made any claims about Jen-Hsun Huang's 570x being plausible or not. Apparently, you not only don't know anything about microelectronics, but your reading comprehension fails you.