Declaration: I declare that this termpaper is my individual work. I have not copied from any other student’s work or from any other source except where due acknowledgment is made explicitly in the text, nor has any part been written for me by another person. Student’s Signature : BHUPINDER SINGH Evaluator’s comments: _______________________________________________________________ ______ Marks obtained : ___________ out of ______________________



but given the consistency. You will also experience better multimedia quality as the graphics core of Ivy Bridge processors have been significantly enhanced as compared to processors belonging to older Intel microarchitecture types. etc. Intel may not have that much to worry about after all! AMD Processors . Intel is a tough contender when it comes to the Intel vs AMD battle. Clarkdale. we have some great Intel processors to look forward to. faster performance at the same power consumption as Sandy Bridge. though not to be confused with the Intel processors of the same name that was built on Nehalem and other earlier microarchitecture types) slated for release by Q2 this year.the latter will give the same performance as the former with lesser power consumed and higher. the Ivy Bridge microarchitecture claims to bring the energy consumption figures lower than all its predecessors such as Sandy Bridge. An immediate successor to Sandy Bridge. superior performance specs and its downward-traveling energy consumption curve. Wolfdale. With its new Ivy Bridge microarchitecture enabled range of processors (Core i5 and Core i7. faster transistors to that and you have a product that is every heavy-duty computer user's dream! To put it simply. Nehalem.INTRODUCTION Intel Processors Not to be outdone by AMD. Add superior integrated graphics output and smaller. Prices would be slightly on the higher side as compared to AMD. those of you who have used Sandy Bridge processors before would be able to realize the improvement Ivy Bridge offers .

While competitive pricing has always been AMD's strength. The latest Opteron series is also all set to enhance server performance and efficiency in an economic way as far as prices and power consumption are concerned. both in terms of price and energy efficiency. However. given different benchmarks. which would mean that you should be able to get your hands on them by March this year. . Bulldozers. In fact. FX-8150 has been considered as a major failure as far as its performance in moderately threaded processes are concerned. is expected to take care of the first generation series' lacunae in terms of consistency and enhanced performance under all kinds of threading benchmarks. AMD's FX-8150 comes across as something of a disappointment. the expectations from the FX range as well as the hype created around it before its launch were sky-high. you're drowning in talk of cores and clock speeds. If the second generation Bulldozer architecture does manage to live up to its claims. The Bulldozer is a totally new architecture design and not an upgradation or modified version of any existing ones. FX8120. it received mixed responses from commercial as well as retail users. being priced higher than Intel's Core i5 2500K with a fluctuating performance.Those of you who have experienced the functionalities of AMD's FX series of processors (FX-8150. the latter being one of AMD processors' biggest weaknesses till date. And so before you even know it. In highly threaded situations. as compared to the latter. Intel vs AMD: which processor is best? Buying a computer can be a lengthy process involving many complex decisions. many users are of the opinion that its performance in less intensively threaded benchmarks reaches lower standards than AMD's Phenom II X6 when the latter is clocked at a slower speed. In fact. Intel may have something to worry about. Hence. the upcoming Piledriver processor range also promises low power consumption. FX-6100 and FX-4100) enabled with the oven-fresh Bulldozer microarchitecture would understand how the first generation Bulldozer enabled processors absolutely dazzle at certain functions while fall below expectations at certain other areas of computing requirements. even in situations of heavy-duty multimedia overloads. AMD has announced the launch of the second generation Bulldozer processors by the end of Q1 of 2012. The FX series of processors are also known to consume a lot of power when overclocked. but none come with quite as much jargon as figuring out the best CPU. The second generation FX series processors are being expected to pack at least 25% higher performance capabilities. FX-8150's performance is almost at the same levels as that of Phenom II X6. once the FX series was launched. if AMD can get the energy usage figures down to Intel processors' levels. Therefore. The second generation Bulldozer core architecture. socket types and memory controllers. codenamed Piledriver. Piledrivers and more. it is certainly possible for Intel's Sandy Bridge to face some stiff competition.

They're the fastest mainstream processors around. And you'll need a not-so-common LGA2011 motherboard. and focus first on a more fundamental question: Intel vs AMD. Intel vs AMD: Intel CPUs If you're after performance above else (and you can afford the price tag) then Intel processors are the way to go. many other decisions about your new PC will fall into place. which processors are the best for you? You'll probably find that answering this is much more straightforward. just for the moment. Intel vs AMD: the AMD competition If you're wondering how it is that Intel can afford to release a new processor family which has changed so little from the last. particularly in the desktop space. so there's no need to worry about new socket types or other board-related complexities. its extra cores. power consumption has fallen. clock speeds and cache are similar. and that's the cheaper model). All of which has helped the technology deliver some impressive results. just a little. cache and quad-channel DDR3 RAM help to deliver a huge amount of raw computing power. there's an easier way to approach your purchasing problems.While you'll need to consider at least some of these issues. particularly where value is important (Sony's stylish and decidedly premium-looking Sony Vaio T13 Ultrabook is a great example). .there are several families available and you need to be careful which you choose. And that's to ignore the technical detail. Sure. the answer is simple: they've very little competition.) But it does also mean that. in general . As our review of the Intel Core i7 3930K shows. though (around £400. the more conventional choice would be to opt for one of Intel's new Ivy Bridge CPUs. particularly in the notebook arena with systems such as the Apple MacBook Pro and Toshiba Qosmio X870. Most people will be better off spending the extra cash on other things. but your manufacturer's website will tell you more. even low-end i3 Sandy Bridge processors are more than adequate for many basic tasks. If you're happy to stick with a regular desktop CPU. This relative stability does have one pleasing side effect: the new family will all slot happily into any current Intel LGA1155 motherboard. It's expensive. And with good reason: as we point out in the review. As we discuss in the Core i7 3770K and Core i5 3570K reviews. You'll get the most speed from Intel's 6-core Sandy Bridge E processors. but they're still in regular use. saving you plenty of time. particularly if you're looking for a bargain. for instance. they're aging a little. and apart from the integrated graphics there's not a great deal of change. though (as well as "Why Intel's new CPUs disappoint"). (At most you'll need to upgrade the BIOS. these new chips aren't exactly revolutionary. There are no more cores. At least. And once you've made your choice. it may still be worth considering one of Intel's older generation Sandy Bridge CPUs. and the new HD 4000 integrated graphics chipset is up to 60% faster than the previous generation. too.

As of April 2012. more than double its competition). Intel's most powerful CPU offering is the Intel Core i7 product line. . And performance is dire. But this makes Bulldozer ridiculously large (2 billion transistors. that's true. And the end results? It's early days. and getting close enough to the Intel equivalent that you probably won't be able to tell the difference. Intel Vs. but when it comes to the mobile world (or small-form-factor systems such as all-in-one computers) it's a slightly different story. The possible breakthrough comes in the shape of AMD's second-generation A-Series processors (formerly known as Trinity). AMD for Gaming Advanced Micro Devices and Intel Corporation are two of the largest developers and manufacturers of central processing units in the world.AMD's latest technology. This still isn't fast enough for dedicated gaming. with the new technology easily outperforming AMD's older mobile technology on raw CPU power. according to Mercury Research statistics reported in PC World. it has 8 cores. So is that the end of the story? Not quite. improved power management and so extended battery life. and that's a big step forward. Both AMD and Intel market heavily to gamers. But the key selling point here is the integrated graphics. Sure. faster integrated graphics. code-named Bulldozer. Intel rules when it comes to conventional desktops. A power hog. but our first benchmarks produced some good news. which we found delivered speeds something close to twice what you'd expect from Intel's new HD 4000 technology (as found in Ivy Bridge CPUs). but does at last mean a laptop will be able to play modern games at reasonable resolutions and detail settings. with single-threaded comparisons showing Bulldozer delivering less speed than an old Phenom II core (and multithreading isn't that great. has proved a monumental disappointment in many different ways. These come with new Piledriver cores (an evolution of Bulldozer). The primary application for high-end CPUs is the gaming and performance personal computer market. while AMD's is the AMD FX series. but which company's products you should choose depends on your needs and budget. either).

try the FX-4100. If money is key then Intel's Pentium G640 is a good place to start. At the low end. But if you'd like to keep up with the latest Ivy Bridge technology then the Sandy Bridge Core i5 3570K isn't much more expensive at about £150. perhaps the 2. if you're an AMD fan.Intel vs AMD: which is best? We've looked at the two products. Just keep in mind that it's really not a chip for regular desktop users. which probably makes it the common sense pick (especially as the Core i5 3770K costs almost twice as much). quad-core and with a 3. should it be necessary. but is still a very capable CPU.6GHz base clock speed. this might mean opting for a Sandy Bridge processor. then life is a little more straightforward . and because it requires a standard LGA1155 socket you'll easily be able to slot in something faster later. Should you be looking for more power within a conventional desktop setting. Or. Best CPU: the 8 top processors today If performance is all. then there's always the Sandy Bridge E-based Intel Core i7 3930K (purchase price around £400). then . but for under £50 you'll get more than enough power for most tasks. It only offers 2 cores (and no support for Hyper-Threading).9 GHz Core i5-2310 (yours from around £120).but which is best? It all depends on what you're looking for. . and the need for an LGA2011 motherboard will seriously limit your options. it's old technology (and more expensive at maybe £80).you just have to choose the best Intel CPU you can afford. and money not a problem.

works with affordable DDR2 memory and can be found in dual and single-core varieties. Intel's integrated video chipsets cost more and offer less value than equivalent AMD integrated boards. while nvidia's recent core logic is simply hard to find. Technically. here's why we picked AMD for our mainstream CPU choice right now. and are the platforms for that CPU stacked full of features? In other words. And that's where decisions become a little more difficult. not least because they'll also include ARM versions. Intel . And of course Windows 8 tablets will further complicate the issue. in particular the supercharged integrated graphics. answering the AMD vs. you could just pick an existing Intel chip. The AMD Athlon64 X2 4850e that is. Before you go screaming to the PCSTATS feedback page. for mainstream PC needs the answer is AMD. in anything from Sony's budget Vaio T13 Ultrabook to the excellent Toshiba Z930 Ultrabook. .The Mainstream Choice When your budget is tight and computer requirements easily satisfied by a mainstream desktop system. there's the best mobile CPU.And then. and for under $90 bucks it's hard to beat when paired with an AMD 780G based motherboard. If you'd like to be able to play modern games on a real budget then they may be worth the wait. finally. Let's take two hypothetical mainstream PCs and compare them so you can see what I mean when I say AMD is the better buy in this instance. and you'll get generally good results. The choice gets complicated once you factor in the motherboard platform. As we discussed earlier. power-efficient. Intel question starts something like this: What's the least expensive CPU with the most value. what's the best bang for buck? Hands down. AMD vs. Each CPU family is pretty inexpensive. But AMD's new A-Series processors have some interesting plus points. the most economical Intel and AMD CPUs on the market are both suitable for users building budget PCs in the sub-$500 category.

why on earth would anyone want a computer they can't hook up to their television? Right? The slightly more expensive AMD 790GX chipset basically just has a faster graphics processor which is a little better suited to gaming. The Athlon64 X2 4850e is clocked at 2. gigabit Ethernet and a compact micro-ATX board size to squeeze in (quietly) next to your stereo Given the shift away from stand alone DVD players and VCRs to downloaded digital content. The Intel Pentium Dual Core E2200 is roughly equivalent to AMD's socket AM2 Athlon64 X2 4850e in both performance and price. Cost wise. That means HDMI output at 1080p with HDCP compliance. both Intel and AMD platforms fair similarly in terms of HD video quality. have 1MB L2 cache. The AMD 780G and even the newer 790GX variant will get you High Definition home theatre without any extra cost. in some cases slightly faster than AMD's 780G and 790GX platforms. there is a third. but lack comparable integrated graphics. The anemic 3D performance offered by Intel's integrated GMA X4500 HD graphics processor makes even low-end gaming a frustrating. So there's that too. 8-channel audio. albeit untested option .that money would be better spent on a Radeon 4650. rather it's a new integrated graphics core. so in that respect you could argue CPU overhead. The GeForce 9300 puts up better performance in 3D graphics than Intel's GMA X4500 HD. Boards based on the Intel G45 Express chipset. which would easily outperform a 790GX motherboard. This isn't a discrete graphics card. have similar features to the AMD 780G. are built on the 65nm processes and run at a native 800MHz bus speed. or just acknowledge that each plays HD video just fine. as the name might imply. I'd be remiss not to mention Intel's abundance of cheap and cheaper processors. It supports Hybrid Crossfire if you crave better 3D gaming down the road. While its gaming performance isn't quite powerful enough to run graphics showcases like Crysis. This speed bump isn't worth the extra $80 AMD is asking . In fact. AMD's 780G integrated Radeon 3200 GPU is capable of smacking around Intel's GMA X4500 HD in World of Warcraft or Call of Duty 4. Both CPUs cost around $100. like the Asus P5Q-EM are available for about $140.AMD's popular 780G chipset is ideal for budget-conscious buyers because it offers decent integrated graphics care of the built-in Radeon 3200 GPU. paired with the Athlon64 X2 4850e chip. lackluster experience. but in real world situations both processors provide nearly identical performance.the nvidia GeForce 9300 chipset. while the Pentium Dual Core E2200 runs at 2. it's hard to beat an AMD 780G-based motherboard like the Asus M3A78-EM (about $100 CDN).5GHz. though it is still "integrated video". but boards built on it are still relatively scarce. Fortunately for Intel users. Intel doesn't have a whole lot to offer those seeking out a motherboard for under $100. Where High Definition content is concerned. .2GHz.

AMD CPUs have been THE processors to have if you are a serious gamer. Lost Planet 2. Historically. Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance. this time PCSTATS tosses two chips into the gaming arena. but remember it's not as if you can use a CPU without a motherboard! Round two is next. . AMD's fastest chip. An E8000-series Intel Core 2 Duo chip in this case is the right tool for the job. while AMD countered with its 790FX. the Phenom X4 9950 ($250 CDN). While that used to be correct for very clear architecture reasons. the latter exists in a much smaller volume of boards. an AMD CPU and AMD 780G based motherboard just offer more value when weighed against a comparable Intel CPU and Intel G45 motherboard. etc. comes second when compared in equivalent systems packing a Core 2 Duo E8500 in dual-core friendly games. Don't spend extra money on getting a processor that gives marginal performance increases in games. Most 3D games don't take full advantage of quad-core processors. Intel has released the 4-series chipsets to much acclaim. As with mainstream PCs. Comparing the chips alone is another argument entirely. instead of the CPU. aside from the ridiculous price the QX9770 isn't all that much faster in games than an E8500 would be in an identical system (expect for a few very specific games which are optimized for quad-cores). But what about quad-core processors? Why not pick a quad-core Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 processor that represents the flagship of Socket 775 chips and costs a mere $1800 CDN? Well.The bottom line is this. AMD's Phenom chips generally can't compare with the Intel Core 2 Duo/Quad because of lower clock speeds per core. and only one will be coming out. Where mainstream computer requirements are concerned. The former is available in hundreds of configurations. and overall frames per second are influenced by the capabilities of the graphics card. chipsets differentiate the performance motherboard segment just as much. the edge AMD once held in the gaming arena is dulled from five years of battle with Intel. The handicap is even more pronounced against the Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 ($240) in the few games which are quad-core optimized Unreal Tournament 3.

The platforms only diverge in gaming prowess when additional videocards are dropped in and SLI'd or Crossfire'd up. Stick to one videocard with that Intel Core 2 Duo E8500. AMD is not far behind and occupies considerable mindshare due to high performance processors at economical price ranges. nVidia 750i. four memory slots. an nVidia nForce 750i is just as quick as a 780i/790i . A P45 or even P35 board is technically as fast an X48. so I've told you that the Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 is my current best bet for a gaming CPU. PCSTATS will cover the pros and cons of SLI and Crossfire systems another day. ASUS' Striker II Extreme overclocking features are massive. . or nvidia's 790i chipset. or any chipset from the same price range. Likewise. However. when it comes to dual videocard gaming with the aforementioned options its hard to beat the Intel X48 chipset. Let's take a brand-by-brand look at AMD and Intel processors to get to know what products each offers and how each has something to say about its prominent presence in the CPU market before jumping to a parallel Intel vs AMD processor comparison 2012. Boards built for multi-videocard gaming are not inherently faster than those best suited for single videocards. If you plan on running a single PCI Express videocard like the dual GPU AMD Radeon HD 4870 X2 or nVidia Geforce 280GTX. and if you overclock you'll find yourself in 7th heaven… but it's wasted on the majority of gaming enthusiasts.Okay. Pairing that processor with the Asus Striker II Extreme (nvidia nForce 790i Ultra SLI Chipset) is freaking overkill. and motherboards using either technology will cost around $250. basic overclocking and sufficient passive chipset cooling. save another $150 on the motherboard and get the same gaming performance as with a board that costs twice as much. pretty much any multivideocard supporting motherboard will get you in the door here. The board costs nearly $450 and will give you more features than you know what to do with. Both chipsets give support for multiple video cards using either Crossfire X or SLI technology (your choice). hardware RAID 0. AMD vs Intel Processor Comparison 2012 Although Intel dominates the market with its high-end. All you need is board based on the Intel P45. coming-of-age processor technologies like the well-received Core i series and the fresh and upcoming Ivy Bridge range. here's a tip. The gaming essentials are Crossfire or SLI multivideocard support. To be frank.

0 in some cases). for high definition images in gaming or video playback. For clock speed. mobile i7s offer 1. and the desktops have 8MB or 12MB. with two cores and four threads. with much of the 2011 range featuring Intel's own Turbo Boost Technology. while some of the desktop series have four cores.6 GHz for the desktop version.4 GHz. updated and improved Turbo Boost.66 GHz on mobile.2 and 2. Which features suit a computer best depends both on the computer itself and on what you plan to do with it. and 2. maximizing efficiency when multiple programs are running. The i7 processors for laptop are duo or quad core. with the higher levels only available on desktop. i3 The Intel Core i3 Desktop and Mobile (laptop) processor range.5 to 3. clock speeds and the amount of cache memory. In terms of threading. The mobile processors within the i5 range offer two cores and four threads. Only part of the range features Intel HD Graphics. managing power to suit your activities.66 GHz (gigahertz) for the mobile version. i5 The Intel Core i5 processors have a clock speed between 1.Clock speed on intel processors Intel processors come with a wide variety of capabilities and performance levels.53 to 3.3 GHz to 3. the i7s provide anything between four and 12.80 GHz.33 GHz on the desktop. although selected desktop models have 4MB. Most of this range has 3MB of cache. The features within Intel processors also vary. All of the processors in the i5 range come with the Hyper-Threading and Turbo Boost Technologies as well as HD Graphics. . and selected models feature second-generation. All of the i7s have Intel Hyper-Threading and Turbo Boost technologies (Turbo Boost 2. feature clock speeds of 1. All of the i3 models come complete with Intel's Hyper-Threading Technology and HD Graphics. i7 The i7 series of Intel processors come in Mobile and Desktop versions. Cache levels for the i5 vary across the range. all of which. determine your computer's ability to perform reliably and quickly regardless of how many programs are running at any time.06 to 2. Hyper-Threading Technology. while the desktop selection have 2.2 to 2. while the desktop versions feature between two and six cores. and HD Graphics. working together. threads. The main specifications for comparing processors are cores. Laptop i7 processors have 4MB to 8MB of cache. and 2. with 3MB on laptops and 3MB to 8MB on the desktop.

5 GHz on a mobile.33 GHz on a desktop. as well as HD Graphics in selected cases. although selected models have 12MB.2 GHz to 3. and 3. With quad core on laptop and either quad core or six core on desktop. Most of the i7 Extreme processors feature 8MB of cache. The i7 processors include Intel's Turbo Boost for targeting your computer's power effectively and Hyper-Threading for managing multiple applications. . threading ranges between eight and 12. Clock speeds range from 2 Ghz to 2.i7 Extreme The i7 Extreme processors for desktop and laptop computers represent the peak of the brand's home computing performance. as of February 2011.

This is due to AMD's chips being able to run at a slower clock speed. an AMD chip running at 3. . This is often a poor indication of a chip's performance.0GHz16MB 115WDDR3-1600 MHzG346238122.4GHz3.3GHz3.[2] Manufacturers typically integrate the cores onto a single integrated circuit die (known as a chip multiprocessor or CMP). in reality. but the multiple cores can run multiple instructions at the same time. and branch.4GHz3. For example.0GHz3. as the CPUs efficiency in handling applications is a more reliable indicator of speed. ARCHITECTURE ADVANCEMENTS PROCESSORS IN LAST 2 DECADES OF INTEL AND AMD A multi-core processor is a single computing component with two or more independent actual central processing units (called "cores").0GHz16MB 115WDDR3-1600 MHzG34622083.1GHz16MB 115WDDR3-1600 MHzG346272162.0 Mhz is.[1] The instructions are ordinary CPU instructions such as add.0 Mhz. increasing overall speed for programs amenable to parallel computing.4GHz16MB 140W DDR3-1600 MHzG346282 SE162.6GHz3.6GHz16MB 115WDDR3-1600 MHzG34621282. or onto multiple dies in a single chip package.1GHz3.2GHz16MB 115WDDR3-1600 MHzG346234122.3GHzN/A16MB 115WDDR3-1600 MHzG346262 HE161.3GHz16MB 115WDDR3-1600 MHzG346276162. while still being able to match the performance of an Intel chip rated at a higher clock speed.6GHz2. move data.6GHz3.2GHz16MB 115WDDR3-1600 MHzG346274162.3GHz16MB 140W DDR3-1600 MHzG346278162.CLOCK SPEED OF AMD PROCESSORS AMD Opteron™ 6200 Series ProcessorsModel NumberCoresClock SpeedAMD Turbo CORE Max FrequencyL3 CacheTDPMaximum Memory SupportSocket Type6284 SE162. which are the units that read and execute program instructions.6GHz3.9GHz16MB 85WDDR3-1600 MHzG34 Difference in Clock Speed The megahertz myth is a belief that clock speeds are the only reliable measure of how well a CPU will perform. faster than an Intel chip designated as 3.2GHz16MB 115WDDR3-1600 MHzG34620443.2GHz3.7GHz3.

this effect is described by Amdahl's law. and i7 at Intel Core). For example. Multi-core processors are widely used across many application domains including general-purpose. ring.Processors were originally developed with only one core. heterogeneous multi-core systems have cores that are not identical. AMD Phenom II X2. possible gains are limited by the fraction of the software that can be run in parallel simutaneously on multiple cores. Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition 980X). but are sometimes also applied to digital signal processors (DSP) and system-on-a-chip (SoC). AMD FX-8150). separate microprocessor dies in the same package are generally referred to by another name. cores in multi-core systems may implement architectures such as superscalar. The improvement in performance gained by the use of a multi-core processor depends very much on the software algorithms used and their implementation. Homogeneous multi-core systems include only identical cores. a hexa-core processor contains six cores (e. vector processing. see i3. a quad-core processor contains four cores (e. Most applications. are not accelerated so much unless programmers invest a prohibitive amount of effort in re-factoring the whole problem. Intel's quad-core processors. Each "core" can be considered a "semiconductor intellectual property core" as well as a CPU core[citation needed]. A dual-core processor has two cores (e. Designers may couple cores in a multi-core device tightly or loosely. i5. This article uses the terms "multi-core" and "dualcore" for CPUs manufactured on the same integrated circuit. or even more if the problem is split up enough to fit within each core's cache(s). two-dimensional mesh.g. Terminology The terms multi-core and dual-core most commonly refer to some sort of central processing unit (CPU). In the best case. and graphics.g. the term multi-CPU refers to multiple physically separate processingunits (which often contain special circuitry to facilitate communication between each other). Intel Core Duo). In contrast to multi-core systems. The terms are generally used only to refer to multi-core microprocessors that are manufactured on the same integrated circuit die. embedded. however. Common network topologies to interconnect cores include bus.[3] The parallelization of software is a significant ongoing topic of research. AMD Phenom II X4. AMD Phenom II X6. and crossbar. so-called embarrassingly parallel problems may realize speedup factors near the number of cores. unless otherwise noted. avoiding use of much slower main system memory.g. The terms many-core and massively multi-core are sometimes used to describe multi-core architectures with an especially high number of cores (tens or hundreds). Intel Xeon E7-2820. SIMD. A multi-core processor implements multiprocessing in a single physical package.g. or multithreading. digital signal processing (DSP). VLIW. In particular. network. . Just as with singleprocessor systems. cores may or may not share caches. such as multi-chip module. an octa-core processor contains eight cores (e. and they may implement message passing or shared memory inter-core communication methods. Some systems use many soft microprocessor cores placed on a single FPGA.

. Some instruction-level parallelism (ILP) methods such as superscalar pipelining are suitable for many applications. A combination of increased available space (due to refined manufacturing processes) and the demand for increased TLP led to the development of multi-core CPUs. These physical limitations can cause significant heat dissipation and data synchronization problems. and multiple independent CPUs are commonly used to increase a system's overall TLP. reducing the size of individual gates. Many applications are better suited to thread level parallelism (TLP) methods. Various other methods are used to improve CPU performance. but are inefficient for others that contain difficult-to-predict code.Development While manufacturing technology improves. physical limits of semiconductor-based microelectronics have become a major design concern.

000 7.000 386™ processor 1985 ** 16 MHz 26 MHz 60 MHz 233 MHz 450 MHz 1500 MHz 275.500 Introduced Rate per chi 1972 . 8088 (the 8-bit sister of the 8086) at 5 Mhz powered the first IBM PCs.000.000 42. ** = 32 bit bus.180.Moore’s Law and the History of Intel Microprocessors Gordon Moore made his famous observation in 1965. just four years after the first planar integrated circuit was discovered.100.250 3. = 8 bit bus.000 80286 1982 * 6 MHz 120. The mission of Intel's technology development team is to continue to break down barriers to Moore's Law Model Year 4004 8008 8080 8086 1971 Clock Transistors 0. Through Intel's technology. 2 MHz 5.000 24. 0. . it had only a 4 bit bus. He forecast that this trend would continue through 1975. In his original paper.000. *** = 32/64 bit bus 4004 was the 1st microprocessor. The press called it "Moore's Law" and the name has stuck.000 1978 * 5 MHz 29. Moore's Law has been maintained for far longer.000 3.2 MHz 1974 .1 MHz 2. and still holds true as we enter the new century.000 1.000 486™ DX processor 1989 ** Pentium® processor 1993 *** Pentium II processor 1997 *** Pentium III processor 1999 *** Pentium 4 processor 2000 *** . * = 16 bit bus. Moore predicted that the number of transistors per integrated circuit would double every 18 months.500.

.[9][10] This trend has continued for more than half a century.[2] [3][4] The paper noted that the number of components in integrated circuits had doubled every year from the invention of the integrated circuit in 1958 until 1965 and predicted that the trend would continue "for at least ten years". sensors and even the number and size of pixels in digital cameras. memory capacity. who described the trend in his 1965 paper. This exponential improvement has dramatically enhanced the impact of digital electronics in nearly every segment of the world economy. The period often quoted as "18 months" is due to Intel executive David House. in part because the law is now used in the semiconductor industry to guide long-term planning and to set targets for research and development.[5] His prediction has proven to be uncannily accurate. the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles approximately every two years. Sources in 2005 expected it to continue until at least 2015 or 2020.[7] All of these are improving at (roughly) exponential rates as well (see Other formulations and similar laws). the 2010 update to the International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors has growth slowing at the end of 2013.Moore's law is the observation that over the history of computing hardware.[1] The law is named after Intel co-founder Gordon E. Moore.[6] The capabilities of many digital electronic devices are strongly linked to Moore's law: processing speed. who predicted that period for a doubling in chip performance (being a combination of the effect of more transistors and their being faster).[8] Moore's law describes a driving force of technological and social change in the late 20th and early 21st centuries.[13] after which time transistor counts and densities are to double only every three years.[note 1][12] However.

(Note that some of these processors were overclocked – the base speed is listed in parentheses). Still. so chip makers have turned to other methods to improve their chips. going from the two million instructions per second (2MHz) of the original Intel 8080 to the 4. including more cores. and the end to hardware upgrades. (Moore's law-Every 18 months to two years (depends on who is counting) computer processor transistors will double themselves. What gets lost sometimes in the incremental gains we see year on year is just how far we have come when you look over time. I went back and looked at how the results have changed over time. (Plenty of other folks test rigs aimed at enthusiasts and gamers). Just looking at high-end desktop processors. But heat and leakage issues have pretty much kept clock speeds from going up very much in recent years. and improved microarchitectures. I just got my latest Computer magazine and ate up the article on Intel's Sandy Bridge tri liner 3D gates.) .Moore's Law still relevant? The actual term refers to a prediction by Intel's Gordon Moore back in 1965 that transistor density will double every 18 months (later changed to every 24 months). I've been running pretty much the same spreadsheet tests on multiple computers. Moore's Law (Intel & AMD) Well some here know of my past post relating to Moore's law. multithreading. That doubling of transistors every two years is still on pace. In the first couple of decades of personal computers. we've taken Moore's Law to mean that the speeds of our desktops will double every two years. Here's how Intel processors have fared while running a complex Monte Carlo Simulation. the question remains: Is performance actually improving? For the past five years or so. to computers that ran at over 3GHz starting about a decade ago. even though it seems like the industry keeps requiring new technology to make it happen.77MHz of the original IBM PC. trying to gauge what new generations of PCs have to offer business users. that meant increased clock speed. the bandwidth on motherboards will take at least a year to catch up). As I was testing Intel's new Ivy Bridge processors and AMD's new Trinity processors on laptops. For most of us in the PC space. There is discussion that these new gates will increase Moore's law. the differences really stand out. (Do not rush out and buy just yet.

AMD does not have the 3D technology and can't develop it because Intel patented the poo out of it. that will even the field back up. do you really need to upgrade? Consider: NLE's take advantage of duel core's and above that the code gets complicated. and the software world? Maybe 4 years.0. then for the next year or so the only upgrade that you may want to consider is keeping pace with video cards. it is such a major HUGE jump that the cost to the entire home user industry may not be worth it. But its ability is limited by the motherboard and memory bandwidth. Moore's law applies to all aspects of the system and unless a change is made to someone use the technology of Video processors GPU's on the CPU die better we still may hit the end of Moore's law. focus on better motherboards. and video port. Why have a Sandy Bridge when you will bottleneck and throttle back in memory. But they have a better GPU than Intel and are focusing on dropping it on the CPU die. memory pathways will need to be increased. but it will be at least 2 years before the hardware world can catch up. Then spend the big bucks on video cards. in fact with the Sandy Bridge on a board today. and duel core procs (I do not know of any customer software yet that can take advantage of quad cores. Buy the best Ive bridge or AMD proc you can and max out your memory (anything over 16GB is just bragging rights). The new structure of the Intel processor does allow for more transistors and faster procs. Sandy Bridge is a nice proc. motherboards will have to increase in bandwidth. The Sandy Bridge processor is a quantum leap for computer technology. So as a videographer.It has long been believed that the ceiling of Moore's law would be reached between 2012-2015. take advantage of the new USB 3. or power bandwidth. BUT. So if you feel the burning need to upgrade to the New Sandy Bridge be prepared for your system to run equal to or slower than that of an Ive Bridge. if you own the best Ive Bridge or Best AMD processor and have maxed memory on your board. They use both the proc and video card to render. no developers are going to spend the money at this time to attempt to capture the average user. but that is why it may not take hold. . the idea of the Sandy Bridge may be too much. See no one was expecting Moore's law to be broken so no one had reason to prepare. But in this case. When video cards can render games almost life like. so having a quad core is more brag then use) can multiprocess most applications. But with the release of the Sandy Bridge Processor that is all changing (Maybe). Why is Moore's law important to video producers? Well we have to upgrade our hardware to be able to run the best software. and in a seriously depressed economy. each trace is a data. More lanes more traffic. the amount of traces (those lines of wire on the motherboard) has reached its limit. Where does this leave AMD. and yes memory itself will have to change. the Ive and AMD procs beat it. For the next year or more as a suggestion. more instructions etc and so forth.

5 billion transistors. Transistor count is the most common measure of integrated circuit complexity. that same magazine stated that OEM makers are not 100% comfortable with putting W8 on their systems when even the greatest tech testers can't figure out how to use W8. the highest transistor count in a commercially available CPU is over 2. in Intel's 10-core Xeon Westmere-EX. Xilinx currently holds the "world-record" for an FPGA containing 6.8 billion transistor . The OEM world is calling W8 the new Vista or Windows ME. According to Moore's Law. On most modern microprocessors. the majority of transistors are contained in caches. So do you rush out and buy W8? If you want W7 with some headaches. The biggest complaint was how to shut off a program. The transistor count of a device is the number of transistors in the device.And one last word on W8. As of 2012. the transistor count of the integrated circuits doubles every two years.

With its radical architecture changes. photo editing and number crunching faster. Compared to AMD's best Phenom X4. AMD question changes. If you cannot hold off. the answer to the Intel vs. be patient and buy into socket 1366 processor platform. AMD is left in the dust as its older 65nm processors lack the muscle needed to compete with Intel's Yorkfield and Wolfdale 45nm offerings.The final word: AMD. the Q9300 ought to handle video processing. Intel. In my experience. Depending on what your PC is used for. If you can wait. even a few months of waiting will mean a significantly longer lifespan for your investment. the AMD vs. 3D rendering. Intel question gets a little complicated. Both routes are more than sufficient for home office or home theatre purposes. In the gaming segment. At the upper end of the scale. users looking towards budget-level PCs (or even HTPC) have a choice between Intel processors paired with the nvidia 9300 chipset. or AMD processors and the AMD 780G chipset. my best advice is to hold off on purchasing a PC system until the full range of Intel Core i7 processors emerge. That being said. walk past the AMD aisle and pick up an Intel Q9000-series processor. . and there are more than a handful of super-enthusiast Intel X58 motherboards to pick from. Intel definitely becomes a favorite as system prices increase for gaming and content creation platforms. the faster clock speeds of the E8000series Core 2 Duo processors offer the best performance for dual core friendly applications. and higher performance curves. Intel.

************************************** . the AMD FX models provide better framerates in gaming tests.Conclusion While the Intel i7s are faster overall. according to benchmarks from Hardware Heaven. allow significant overclocking and are less expensive in 2012 than comparable Intel processors.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful