4 ms·
Honestly who even needs a 1.4nm? Hell, who needs a damned 10nm? Most people could get by on yester-decade’s CPUs no problem. We need something new, not the sam
by bjornjaja 7y ago
Honestly who even needs a 1.4nm? Hell, who needs a damned 10nm? Most people could get by on yester-decade’s CPUs no problem.
We need something new, not the same old “add more cameras to the phone” kind of innovations.
It’s the engineers that will make those discoveries—the investors can shove it. All they do is freeload on innovation and cramp peoples style.
- meddlepal 7y agoYou're thinking is flawed. Consumers don't give a damn for the most part, but Intel isn't building this tech for them. They're doing this for enterprise data centers which demand smaller, more powerful, and energy efficient chips constantly.
- wtallis 7y agoConsumers also care about getting better energy efficiency out of their battery powered devices. It's really just the desktop PC market where being stuck with 14nm CPUs is a non-issue, because wall power is cheap and cooling is easy.
- meddlepal 7y agoI agree, they care about battery performance, but they don't understand the correlation of CPU to battery so they don't purchase based on that criteria. The vendor that makes the device definitely cares though I wonder how much Intel cares about consumer oroducts as percentage of mkt share compared to servers.
- staticassertion 7y agoData centers absolutely care about power usage.
- meddlepal 7y agoThat's what I said...
- madengr 7y agoI’d like a higher clock frequency, as the software I use does not scale well across cores. Things have been stuck sub 4 GHz for many years.
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 7y agoYou can probably rewrite the codebase to utilize n threads before anyone releases an 8, 12, 36ghz CPU.
- madengr 7y agoIt’s electromagnetic simulation, specifically finite element. You can parallelize some of the math, but mostly not. You can break the structure into smaller sub-domains, but that has issues too. Not much gain beyond 2-4 cores.
- david-gpu 7y agoNot my area of expertise, but I was under the impression that finite element analysis, like other sparse algebra problems, are reasonably well suited for GPUs, which are much more parallel than 2 or 3 cores. Have you looked into that?
- madengr 7y agoThe time domain codes work well with GPUs and multiple cores, but the frequency domain ones don’t. I don’t know enough of what’s going on under the hood, but it’s like that for all of them.
- wbl 7y agoI've worked with applied math PDE people and they use supercomputers to full effect. Granted it's a real pain and your cross connect bandwidth matters (hence supercomputer), but you can scale up pretty well.
- mNovak 7y agoI thought FE was mostly memory bandwidth bound?
- simias 7y agoEven if you don't need the power (and you sometimes do, and even if you don't right now there'll be some electron app that will make you wish you had a 1.4nm CPU eventually) improving the process usually means better efficiency too which is important to make batteries last longer and datacenter less wasteful. It'll probably make for some good looking videogames too.
- ksec 7y agoI might not need more improvement than today's state of the art Consumer CPU. But even the best in class GPU are not over powered for gaming. With Ray Tracing and 4K I could easily use another 4 - 8x transistor density.