is intel CPU's slowing down in the past 3 years

[nec207]

The past 3 years intel CPU's have been slowing down alot .If you got CPU in 2009 and got new CPU 2012 that only 50% increase !!

Where has before 2006 to 2009 that be 100% to 150% increase !! Alost 2 times faster !!

Same has 2003 to 2006 100% to 150% increase !! Alost 2 times faster !!

What is going on with intel now.This not good a CPU from 2003 to 2009 is like 4 times faster but CPU in 2009 and got new CPU 2012 that only 50% increase .

[sffvba[e0rt]

Moar cores less megahurts...


404

[Bandit]

AMDs have been slowing down even more. The most recent 8 core is still much much slower then intels older Sandy i5 2500. Which saddens me. I like AMD.
The newer Ivy line up, even though its mainly just a die shrink, is a tad faster. Their Ivy i7 3770 (Quad Core) is neck and neck with their Sandy i7 3930 (6 Core) and almost half the price.
So their still moving along just fine. Now wished someone would get the sand out of AMDs gear box and get some real performance kicking again.

[LowSky]

While speed might not seem to be improving, thermals are getting much better. I don't want 2006 back where I need 5 fans on high to cool my pc

[Paqman]

Clock speed isn't a good measure of performance when you're comparing chips with different architectures. A 2003 Intel chip is a different animal to a 2012 Intel chip.

[alexfish]

Do not know what is happening on the main frame scene , for home use I prefer low power ,for the average desk top find the Intel atom adequate ,it is one of my favourite boards , but have added a respectable graphics card. The next will be the 12v direct input, IE no big case or bulky PSU.

[nec207]

AMDs have been slowing down even more. The most recent 8 core is still much much slower then intels older Sandy i5 2500. Which saddens me. I like AMD.
The newer Ivy line up, even though its mainly just a die shrink, is a tad faster. Their Ivy i7 3770 (Quad Core) is neck and neck with their Sandy i7 3930 (6 Core) and almost half the price.
So their still moving along just fine. Now wished someone would get the sand out of AMDs gear box and get some real performance kicking again.


Are all i7 about the same or is some i7 50% faster to 150% faster than other i7?

In the past AMD was much faster than intel it did more work per clock cycle.

[ExSuSEusr]

They're going to milk it for all they can get out of it.

Way back when, when they were releasing 350 MHz and 400 MHz chips... you think they didn't have the technology or ability to build a 1 gig chip? Of course they did - but by releasing chips in a stepwise process then can generate a continuous cash flow.

They'll get faster - I'd bet they already have the plans for faster multi-cores - but for the time being they're going continue with the step-release process.

[nec207]

Around 2004 or 2005 CPU hit brick wall of 3 GHz and if they tried to go to 3.5 Ghz or 4 Ghz it will overheat so they started to have mti cores and improving CPU architecture ( do more work per per clock cycle) .Now it is making the GPU part of the CPU too than having GPU on the motherboard.

I also hear new CPU are starting to take the chipsets of the motherboard and have that part of the CPU too.

Part of the problem why there little CPU out there with 6 cores , 8 cores or 12 cores is most software is coded for 2 cores and some 4 cores .

[rmil]

No reason to push CPU so much when other components such as BUS, RAM and HDD are slow. Hence It is much better to push multitasking (more cores) to play with slow background.

[Bandit]

Are all i7 about the same or is some i7 50% faster to 150% faster than other i7?

In the past AMD was much faster than intel it did more work per clock cycle.

I cant say anything is ??% faster then the other. But you can check anandtech.com for their in house benchmarks to get a better idea of what you may want. Currently a Ivy i7 3770 Quad Core from Intel is 320ish USD and IMHO for the performance it delivers is an exceptional buy. I could save 100 USD and get a AMD 8150 8 Core CPU, but its not even half the performance of the 3770, so not worth the savings if your looking for performance -vs- cost comparison as I am.

[KiwiNZ]

People get hung up on numbers, what really counts is , does the device do the actions required of it for you?
If yes all is fine, if not buy one that does.

[Bandit]

Way back when, when they were releasing 350 MHz and 400 MHz chips... you think they didn't have the technology or ability to build a 1 gig chip? Of course they did - but by releasing chips in a stepwise process then can generate a continuous cash flow.

They'll get faster - I'd bet they already have the plans for faster multi-cores - but for the time being they're going continue with the step-release process.
I remember that and agree. To increase speed of a CPU they basicly have to re refine the fabrication process. Basicly a 600MHz CPU and 750Mhz released the same time, normally are the same chip. They just lock the clock multipliers and resale the same CPU over and over to recoup their R&D funding back. Which I cant blame them. There is some testing, not all of the CPUs will run as fast as others, but lets face it. Every batch of CoolAid isnt made the same either. :)



Around 2004 or 2005 CPU hit brick wall of 3 GHz and if they tried to go to 3.5 Ghz or 4 Ghz it will overheat so they started to have mti cores and improving CPU architecture....
Yea I believe the fabrication process these days are starting to hit a brick wall. 3D Arch like used in the Ivy Bridge CPUs may offer a solution to those limitations. At least I hope they do.



No reason to push CPU so much when other components such as BUS, RAM and HDD are slow. Hence It is much better to push multitasking (more cores) to play with slow background.
This is very true as well. A 1Ghz CPU from 10 years ago, doesnt have the same potential as a 1Ghz CPU made today. There are so many other things to consider when choosing a processor. Take a look a GPUs for example. :D

[Bandit]

People get hung up on numbers, what really counts is , does the device do the actions required of it for you?
If yes all is fine, if not buy one that does.

LOL while I agree whole heartidly. CPUs are like automobiles. Some prefer 4 door family sedans, some of us prefer sports cars that go 250KM a hour.. Sadly I got the sedan.. :(

[nec207]

I cant say anything is ??% faster then the other. But you can check anandtech.com for their in house benchmarks to get a better idea of what you may want. Currently a Ivy i7 3770 Quad Core from Intel is 320ish USD and IMHO for the performance it delivers is an exceptional buy. I could save 100 USD and get a AMD 8150 8 Core CPU, but its not even half the performance of the 3770, so not worth the savings if your looking for performance -vs- cost comparison as I am.

Have you or others here done some benchmarks here? I seriously doubt any i7 will be 2 times faster than other i7 even if you got low end i7 and top of the line i7 .

Even low end i5 and high end i7 I seriously doubt will be 2 times faster.

[codingman]

Moar cores less megahurts...


404

^

if only AMD's butt would get movin' and make a rockin' awesome cpu like the beautiful athlon series.

[tjeremiah]

with programs becoming more lighter,does it matter much anymore?

[sffvba[e0rt]

IMO hardware had trailed behind software for most of the past and only in recent history has the roles reversed... Our hardware is plenty fast enough to handle what we through at it and the focus on computing has simply changed. Smaller, less power etc.

Then again, the brute power of an i7 is amazing :)


404

[Lucradia]

Intel's not focused on cores much actually. They are more focused on Threading. Threads aren't cores, and never will be.

with programs becoming more lighter,does it matter much anymore?

JAVA is still used a lot, like in Minecraft. So yes, it does matter. JAVA isn't the only heavy language though, lots of people use .NET.

[Bandit]

Have you or others here done some benchmarks here? I seriously doubt any i7 will be 2 times faster than other i7 even if you got low end i7 and top of the line i7 .

Even low end i5 and high end i7 I seriously doubt will be 2 times faster.

Dude, I pointed out to go to Anandtech.com and look over their benchmarks if someone is looking for numbers. This isnt a benchmarks forum, I dont benchmark stuff for a living, we dont benchmark stuff here unless its just for fun, and the those numbers are not in a lab environment and cant be 100% accurate. Anands test come out with the same results as many other hardware tech sites, so the numbers are consistent. But to say Ubuntu 12.04 is twice as fast on the top of the line i7 compared to the older i5s is crazy. Most folks including myself would not be able to tell the performance difference by playing around with the OS. For me to say anything is % faster then anything, then all you would get is arbitrary numbers. And everyone here knows arbitrary numbers are arbitrary. Go to Anands site for REAL numbers, it will show you how long things take to load or process based on multiple application test that is very extensive. Then you can come to your own conclusion.

Hope this clears this up. :D

Joe

[kef_kf]

AMDs have been slowing down even more.

This.

With AMD basically out of competition intel has no incentive to roll out new stuff.

They sat on ivybridge what.. a year?

[Redblade20XX]

Hardware (such as the cpu) is reaching a theoretical limit due to quantum tunneling and other inate factors. That's why more companies are producing multi-core systems instead of higher clocked single cpus. But just as my DSP professor said, today's hardware is extremely powerful but the way we write software is pretty inefficient. So maybe if we reach a hardware deadpoint, we must re-evaluate the software point.

-Red

[mips]

But just as my DSP professor said, today's hardware is extremely powerful but the way we write software is pretty inefficient. So maybe if we reach a hardware deadpoint, we must re-evaluate the software point.


AMDs Bulldozer would be a good example I think.

[nec207]

^

if only AMD's butt would get movin' and make a rockin' awesome cpu like the beautiful athlon series.


Yes AMD has more cores and higher clock speed but intel is still faster with less cores and lower clock speed do to the CPU architecture.



Hardware (such as the cpu) is reaching a theoretical limit due to quantum tunneling and other inate factors. That's why more companies are producing multi-core systems instead of higher clocked single cpus. But just as my DSP professor said, today's hardware is extremely powerful but the way we write software is pretty inefficient. So maybe if we reach a hardware deadpoint, we must re-evaluate the software point.

Not many software at all is coded for 4 cores that alone more than 4 cores.

What is point having 6 cores , 8 cores or 12 cores when the software is not coded for it.

Also games hardly use the CPU now days has most games now use GPU . It mostly in graphics ,music editing and video editing and most pro do that for job buy CPU racks or use cloud computing.

[Paqman]

Not many software at all is coded for 4 cores that alone more than 4 cores.

What is point having 6 cores , 8 cores or 12 cores when the software is not coded for it.


True, if you were only ever running one thing at a time. Even a single browser spawns multiple processes these days.

There's a limit to how much you can parallelise some tasks anyway. Some things do have to be done in a sequential order.

[sandyd]

The past 3 years intel CPU's have been slowing down alot .If you got CPU in 2009 and got new CPU 2012 that only 50% increase !!

Where has before 2006 to 2009 that be 100% to 150% increase !! Alost 2 times faster !!

Same has 2003 to 2006 100% to 150% increase !! Alost 2 times faster !!

What is going on with intel now.This not good a CPU from 2003 to 2009 is like 4 times faster but CPU in 2009 and got new CPU 2012 that only 50% increase .
Moore's Law states that the number of transistors that can be put on a cpu doubles every 2 years.

However, we are now reach the point where our technology is not capable of doing so (i.e. making the transistors smaller and closer) . Unless we add new technology, the power of CPUs will continue in this fashion.
See http://www.itrs.net/Links/2010ITRS/2010Update/ToPost/2010Tables_ORTC_ITRS.xls

[Redblade20XX]

Not many software at all is coded for 4 cores that alone more than 4 cores.

What is point having 6 cores , 8 cores or 12 cores when the software is not coded for it.

Also games hardly use the CPU now days has most games now use GPU . It mostly in graphics ,music editing and video editing and most pro do that for job buy CPU racks or use cloud computing.

The point is that single core processing is being held up by hardware limitations and that's why manufacturers are going multi-core bananas even though software wise there is poor implementation of symetric multi-processing. What I meant by "revaluating software" is not how we write code for applications but the actual logic going into what we call code. Maybe it's time to move away from binary language to trinary language.
:lolflag:

-Red

[QIII]

I don't think AMD is losing a race they don't intend to run. Let Intel go on its way.

AMD saw a different future as far back as 2006, when they bought ATI. And that wasn't dedicated graphics cards forever.

Look at the direction of the market, the sort of hardware that will emerge and what will succeed in a world no longer dominated by the desktop and even the notebook loses its primacy.

Intel is chasing the wrong consumer rabbit.

[nec207]

The point is that single core processing is being held up by hardware limitations and that's why manufacturers are going multi-core bananas

What hardware limitations ?




even though software wise there is poor implementation of symetric multi-processing. What I meant by "revaluating software" is not how we write code for applications but the actual logic going into what we call code. Maybe it's time to move away from binary language to trinary language.
:lolflag:

-Red


What is wrong with using binary language?

When optical computers or quantum computers come around in the future I'm sure than we need all new programming for software.