Re: [gentoo-user] new machine : CPU : 22 nm vs 32 nm

[Dale]

Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote:
>> The point made about producing less heat with the smaller nm sounds
>> reasonable tho.
> Less heat with the smaller nm, but only if all other things remain equal!
>
> In reality, manufacturers use additional margin within their TDP to
> improve the product otherwise. Perhaps they increase the clock speed
> somewhat. Perhaps they increase the amount of on-die cache. Perhaps
> they reduce the instruction pipeline.
>
> AMD, for example, has tended to maintain keep something in the market
> for a 125W, 95W and 65W TDPs for several years. Each year, the
> functionality that used to be in a 125W TDP processor shows up in a
> 95W TDP processor, and the latest 125W TDP processor beats the pants
> off of last years'.
>


I found this to be plain weird when I built my new rig.  My old rig was
a AMD 2500+ single core system with 2Gbs of ram.  It pulled about 400
watts or so for normal desktop use.  A little more when compiling and
such.  My new rig, AMD Phenom II 955 with four cores and 16Gbs of ram. 
Heck, just a single core is much faster than my old rig.  Thing is, the
new rig pulls less than half of what the old one pulls, WHILE
COMPILING.  I can't recall the nm part but I think the CPU I got for my
old rig was supposed to be for laptop use. 

AMD sure is getting more efficient as you point out.  I still wonder
where we will be in 10 years.  Just how fast can they make them?

Dale

:-)  :-) 

-- 
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!