Quad-Core CPUs in Half of All Notebooks in 2015

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]THEfog101[/nom]*Waiting for the usual whine about battery life*[/citation]
Pssh, battery! We all know that notebooks in 2015 will be ran on a small nuclear reactor 😉
 
Only 50%? Shouldn't it be 50% by 2013 when both Intel and AND should be on 22nm? By 2015 they should both be on 18nm (I believe it's 18nm next, no?) and anything above bottom budget laptop would have hex core processors at least I'd think. (Hell, even the tablets coming out early 2012 are supposed to be quad core)
 
[citation][nom]Yargnit[/nom]Only 50%? Shouldn't it be 50% by 2013 when both Intel and AND should be on 22nm? By 2015 they should both be on 18nm (I believe it's 18nm next, no?) and anything above bottom budget laptop would have hex core processors at least I'd think. (Hell, even the tablets coming out early 2012 are supposed to be quad core)[/citation]

Agreed. Though they would be on 16nm. Since you get a doubling of transistors every node, you would get a quadrupling every other node and that would make it exactly half the half-pitch. So to figure out the upcoming node, you would simply take the node before the current one and half it (ie half of 32 is 16)
 
Why is this necessary? Doesn't a HT dual core provide a better battery life to performance balance? How many people even use their laptops for CPU intensive tasks.
 
prom dresses i

Flower girl dresses

Mother of the bride dresses

Prom Dresses
 
For 2015, this projection seems rather low. I'd expect the number of quad core equipped shipments to be much higher. Even dual cores today are starting to show their limitations in certain areas other than gaming. This is particularly evident in the mobile space where dual cores are clocked even lower.
 
i just want a very low power core2duo at say, 2,6ghz, if they do it with 32nm tecnology i bet it would stay below 10W consumption.
 
[citation][nom]iubyont[/nom]Why is this necessary? Doesn't a HT dual core provide a better battery life to performance balance? How many people even use their laptops for CPU intensive tasks.[/citation]
The whole point of technology is to push the boundaries and make things better.
If we were to simply stop innovating or pushing hardware, then the entire market will get stale.
 
If it really takes that long to get 50% of laptops shipped having quad cores, we better be seeing at least 50% of desktops having hexa or octocore around the same time.

I don't just play games, I do a lot of work that would utilize all those cores so it's important from my point of view.
 
According to intel's tiktok map haswell(22 nm) will come in early 2013 with 8 core and 32 mb of l3 cache followed by broadwell and skylark (14 nm) after it skymont (10 nm) So i think in 2015 almost every budget notebook would atleast have a hexa core or octa core in it
 
[citation][nom]walter87[/nom]The whole point of technology is to push the boundaries and make things better.If we were to simply stop innovating or pushing hardware, then the entire market will get stale.[/citation]


That's great and all but if you don't have the technology to post better battery life with a quad core mobile device then it becomes more of an annoyance then a convenience of having Quad Cores in a mobile device.
 
[citation][nom]stonedatheist[/nom]Agreed. Though they would be on 16nm. Since you get a doubling of transistors every node, you would get a quadrupling every other node and that would make it exactly half the half-pitch. So to figure out the upcoming node, you would simply take the node before the current one and half it (ie half of 32 is 16)[/citation]
Nooo...Think about it. Intel will be at 16nm, AMD will still be at 22.
Also, 2015 should have 6-8 cores in half of all laptops. Most of the bulldozer chips coming out will be 8-core designs, which means that the laptops will integrate them shortly afterwards, and intel won't take that sitting down.
 
[citation][nom]iubyont[/nom]Why is this necessary? Doesn't a HT dual core provide a better battery life to performance balance? How many people even use their laptops for CPU intensive tasks.[/citation]

Auto Cad 3D on the job site
 
[citation][nom]theangelusmortis[/nom]i just want a very low power core2duo at say, 2,6ghz, if they do it with 32nm tecnology i bet it would stay below 10W consumption.[/citation]Why would you want that? It'd get smoked by a low power Sandy Bridge (or even Nehalem), let alone Ivy Bridge. C2D architecture is old and less efficient (like K10), so look to the future instead of dwelling on the past.
 
[citation][nom]dalauder[/nom]Why would you want that? It'd get smoked by a low power Sandy Bridge (or even Nehalem), let alone Ivy Bridge. C2D architecture is old and less efficient (like K10), so look to the future instead of dwelling on the past.[/citation]
I think you are missing the point. C2D is 'good enough' for most applications. What we want is cheap and power efficient. I have a couple Atom netbooks, and they are great for battery life and the ability to run x86 programs. But I am under no delusions that the processor sucks. Compared with my brother's 1st gen Core 2, and even my 1st gen Core (1) Duo, atom lagggggggggggs, even with 2 gb ram, W7 and an OCZ Agility SSD... If you could shrink the C2D (a tried and true architechture) to atom sizes, and sell them as the netbook proc of choice, you would have a LOT of happy customers, including myself.

Sure, MS could use Sandy Bridge, and they would make me pay MORE for an atom sized/powered version (i7 ULV anyone?). There is a niche for that, but it isn't my niche. It isn't what theangelusmortis is looking for...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom