Intel at 65-nm in 2005?

Discussion in 'MacRumors News Discussion (archive)' started by MacRumors, Nov 24, 2003.

  1. macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001
    eeTimes and ZDNet are reporting on Intel's push into the 65-nm chip design space.

    Intel announced that they are targeting 65-nm chips in 2005 with SRAM samples at this time. ZDNet provides a good overview of the advantages and challenges in reducing chip size. In short, a smaller chip "improves performance, reduces costs and can potentially cut energy consumption."

    Current chips, including the PowerPC 970, have been produced at 130-nm, but both Intel and IBM are ramping up 90-nm chip production at this time. 90nm PowerPC chip technology will be presented in February 2004 by IBM and will presumably make their way into future Macintoshes.

    As previously reported IBM also plans on introducing 65-nm chips in 2005 using their SSOI (Strained Silicon on Insulator) technology.
  2. macrumors 68000

    Jun 25, 2003
    This basically means is that there'll be no time for resting on laurels in the ongoing chip war. The challenge for Apple and IBM will be to develop low-power chips to compete in the laptop space.
  3. macrumors member

    Oct 20, 2003
    Well now, we don't hear about Moto doing anything like this. Intel really doesn't have anything until they go 64bit, and no, the itanium don't count

    edit: dang, though I was going to have first post
  4. dho
    macrumors 6502

    Sep 7, 2003
    Lets hope IBM can beat them there

    good news i supose :)
  5. macrumors 68040


    Apr 21, 2003
    washington dc
    sounds good to me... i'd like a little healthy competition... will only help apple if they get better chips to work with.

    :D :D
  6. macrumors 603


    Jun 19, 2003
    Chicago, IL
  7. macrumors newbie

    Sep 27, 2003
  8. macrumors 65816

    Oct 24, 2003
    I'm guessing IBM will be beating everyone with their quick form factor changes.
  9. macrumors 68000


    May 15, 2003
    San Francisco
    I think it's fantastic we're back in the game. The mere fact that we're "in competition" with Intel is a testament to how much better off we are with IBM than we were with Motorola.
  10. macrumors 65816

    Oct 24, 2003
    AMD won't have 90nm until around the middle of next yr compared to IBM which will have them probably by the end of Jan. and at the latest by Feb.

    I know IBM already has 65nm design which I don't even think Intel has completely worked out yet. I don't even think AMD has 65nm design yet.
  11. macrumors 68000

    Dec 24, 2001
    Carson City, NV
    IBM is partnering with AMD on 65nm R&D

    I would expect that PPC at 65nm and AMD at 65nm will be in the same time frame, more or less (since IBM is driving the technology). Isn't nvidia a partner as well? With all of the game console manufacturers, this could become very interesting.
  12. macrumors 6502a

    Aug 10, 2003
    amd is our main competitor now. their 64-bit platform continues to expand, while intel's itanium line cant really compete.

    and what news from the riddermark..(too much Lotr).. i mean what news/rumors from Moto? will we EVER see a new Moto chip?
  13. macrumors 6502

    Jul 17, 2002
    I used to read this kind of news story with dred, but with the G5 and the IBM roadmap, I say - no problemo.

    We can do that. And do it with style.

    So nice to be back in the game.
  14. macrumors regular

    Mar 3, 2003
    Nothing like some good, healthy competition.

  15. macrumors 6502a


    Nov 3, 2003
    CD: TX-14
    Competition good

    Competition results in lower prices:D So let's kick some butt guys!
  16. macrumors member

    Aug 28, 2002
    Western North Carolina
    Blowing smoke

    I won't pretend to be very knowledgeable of the processor industry but I do work in advertising. Notice they do not have 65 nm but "plan" to have one in over a year. What happens physcologically is that people associate Intel with 65 nm. Most people don't read the details. Until they have something of substance then it is not worth much. My impression of this is just INTEL generating spin to try and get a little of the lime-lite dominated by the G5.
  17. macrumors member

    Mar 22, 2003
    North Augusta, SC
    Re: Blowing smoke

    Intel with 65nm? INTEL generating spin? I'm confused; don't you mean Big Blue here.. ?
  18. macrumors 6502a


    Jan 20, 2003
    Re: Blowing smoke

    They are currently sampling SRAM at 65nm. I don't see any vapor or deception here.
  19. macrumors regular

    Jun 15, 2003
    Seeing as IBM is basically the only PPC producer left, and Apple would never switch to Intel, competition isn't really so relevant.
  20. macrumors member

    Aug 28, 2002
    Western North Carolina
    Again, not a chip guy butÉI don't think SRAM is quite the same as a working processor. However I don't know the industry well enough to know what it takes to get from where they are right now to having a working processor, butÉ they seem to think more than a year. Again my impression is that this is just PR trying to position themselves as technology leaders before the Christmas rush.

    If any techies out there want to explain the ins and outs of all this it would be interesting.

    There is not a single company that doesn't generate spin. I heard enough from Motorola over the years. And I am sure I've heard it from Big Blue. But right now about 2 feet from where I am sitting I have a Dual 2 ghrz G5 with 1.5 gigs of RAM(plenty of room to grow), 250 GB HD, 9800 pro video card, and loving it. And that my friends is what counts.
  21. macrumors 6502

    Oct 30, 2002
    Austin, TX
    I hope that they're not counting on this shift to do it - basically, everyone benefits the same amount from a move to smaller production sizes. The P-M (aka Centrino chip) is a kick-ass mobile chip <I>today</I>, definately the one to beat. Sure, a 65nm G5 would be fantastic. Just beating yesterday's intel won't impress anyone though, since they're going to be right there with the process, effectively nullifying the relative gain.

    Its nice that intel and IBM have similar timeframes though - it somewhat validates the technology claims of both to be able to churn out the high-density high-transistor chips in the real world.

  22. macrumors member

    Aug 28, 2002
    Western North Carolina
    never mind.

    I'm just blowing smoke myself. But I do love my G5.
  23. macrumors member

    Jan 23, 2003
    Interesting how Intel and MS can only talk about what they're doing three years into the future now (but oh boy, its gonna be great!:rolleyes: )

    The times they are a changin'
  24. macrumors 6502

    Jul 25, 2002
    AMD Athlon-64/Opteron vs Itanium

    Everyone likes to bash the Itanium chips but it actually is started to take off, and a great design. You don't see Apple carrying extra luggage from the 6502 or 680x0 processors in the PPC.

    If you have ever programmed in x86 assembly you would know that it is complete hell because the x86 instruction set has been extended many, many times.

    It has gone from the 4004 (4-bit), to the 8008 (8-bit), to the 8080, 8086/8088, 80186 (flop), 80268 (added memory production), 80386sx/dx (added 32-bits), 80486sx/sx2/dx/dx2/dx4 (added floating point internally), Pentium, Pentium MMX (added basic vector processing), Pentium Pro (Added support for more than 32-bit addresses), Pentium II, Pentium III (Added SSE), and Pentium 4 (Added SSE2, CPUID)....and lets not forget that in either the Pentium or Pentium Pro they added SMP support. And how about 3D Now, a failed instruction set from AMD.

    The AMD is a horrific design. It once again adds extends the processor, adding more complexity to decoding and execution, and to assembly language design. No new registerers. The x86 has always suffered from a lack of registers. Modes have to be switched, which adds overhead.

    The Itanium 2 fixes many problems from the original Itanium. It is even further reduced than RISC...its designed from the ground up as a modern processor....the compiler gets to define instructions in blocks, and specify how it works across multiple pipelines to correctly fill the processor to its max...instead of extra decoding at execution time. Its a simpler design, but leads to more complicated compilers, a problem that plagued the first processor.

    The only part that the Itanium does not deal well with is legacy x86 code. But out of complete seriousness, if you are running 64-bit apps, there aren't many 32-bit apps you should be running at the sametime. The Itanium does very will in benchmarks.

    Dell refused to work with the first Itanium, but are now seling a good number of the new Itanium 2s. While competition is good, the AMD 64 bit processors area really bad idea, from the ground up, they are based on a very outdated instruction set, one that has been extended around 10 times. It is time for the x86 architecture to be retired.
  25. macrumors 68030


    Jan 31, 2003
    Chi Town
    didn't they spin off most of their processor division?

Share This Page