From one primitive core to a five-core monster, one of which is a video card - a very interesting decade for us in the field of processors.
At 2001, when the site came into the world, the processor market had just gone into high gear: the GHz barrier was crossed, first by AMD, Then also by Intel. The latter, which to date leads the market for processors both technologically and in terms of market share,Pentium 4, in the hope that high frequency will compensate for the low processing efficiency of the architecture.
Partly trick managed. The Pentium 4, which in addition to the high frequency also added several sets of new commands, did not display more processing efficiency than the Athlon MP, but the larger clock speeds looked good on the billboards, which sold,AMD Sold its processors at the price of Pentium 3, which it left Intel To lower markets.
Not just clock speed
Here one has to stop for a moment and explain that a processor's capability is measured not only by its clock speed, but also by its ability to handle specific calculations quickly. When we say "command set" we mean a number of units in the processor that are built into it and are dedicated to those specific calculations, such as video editing, images, audio, compression or file layout, encryption and even games. Of course software support is required, but this is a very small disadvantage once both Intel processors and processors AMD Contain the same set of commands.
|CPU + AMD 1500
With Palomin's core
The problem with the Pentium 4 was That he was hot. So hot that Intel was the first to develop a diode that would turn off the processor as soon as it was dangerously hot. Of course, the problem could be solved by purchasing a larger cooling unit (which the hardware professionals did anyway, for the processor to speed up), but Intel She could not let her reputation go down the drain. Instead, the company began a process that continues to this day: reducing the production process of the processors.
- This article is part of a project Summary of the decade according to HWzone
Imagine a cake: you can cut the same cake (300 nanometer square, for that matter) into slices of 180 nanometer (the Willamette core, with the irritating tendency to die from warming), but also to smaller slices of 130 nanometers . In which situation will you get more slices? Of course, in reality reducing the slices means finding a way to reduce the distance between the transistors while preventing electrical leakage between them, but the process also has other advantages but more Processors Per wafer, reducing heat emissions, reducing power consumption, and the ability to work at higher frequencies.
|Wafer of displayed 22 nm
על ידי Intel In 2009
If Intel can reduce the Willamette from the production of 180 nanometers to a production process of 130 nanometers And get a successful Northwood core, is also AMD Can do the same thing. The core of the Palomino AMD Has also been enhanced to the production of 130 nanometers, now called Thoroughbred. This is where Intel has an advantage in terms of marketing, since the Pentium 4 with the Northwood cores reached tremendous frequencies for the time of 2.6 and even 2.8 GHz, while the processors of AMD They found it difficult to keep up, but were more efficient. Processor from home AMD, Such as the Athlon XP that captured the hearts of hardware enthusiasts at that time, the frequency of 1.8 GHz could display higher performance than the processor of Intel At a frequency of 2.4 GHz (which is without reference to price differentials for AMD).
AMD has the advantage, though Intel Leading
In 2003, AMD had new competitors in line with Intel's aging Northwood, which also achieved performance in games and multimedia. The Athlon XP 2X00 +'s strong points were low cost and high frequency efficiency, which AMD also worked on in next-generation processors: the Athlon 64 (which we published at the time) Comprehensive site review). In these processors, the memory controller of the chipset system migrated to the processor core, and here AMD made a gamble Processor support for 64 bit (Ie, the ability to process larger pieces of information in each clock cycle relative to the 32 bit processor, such as Intel's) will persuade consumers to favor AMD's processors?
|Processor Pentium 4 Quickly
Willamette core owner
To date, the entire PC market has not undergone a storm to be processed on the 64 bit (although it happens, slowly but surely), but this convinced the hardware professionals AMD Are better. That, and comprehensive performance tests with reference to cost versus benefit (which was preferable at AMD). This situation continued for the next two years, with the battle between Core One to one core became a two-core battle against two cores.
In 2005, we already had 90 processorsSan Diego and Venice (accolades), From AMD, and the market situation was such The core market was high, And were keen to the lower markets. AMD's advantage in the battle is maintained, Since two efficient cores led to performance on two less efficient cores of the same frequency. Nevertheless, in Israel they continued to buy Intel, both because there was no orderly import of processors AMD To Israel, and because what did come was too expensive.
The big debate was about the need: "Why do I need two cores if most of the software I use utilizes only one?" The immediate answer was video, audio and image editing software, which learned to utilize more than one core, and of course, the fact that dual cores coped much better with multi-tasking, such as playing while compressing or deploying files. A few years later games also learned to utilize two cores (or more, we haven’t talked about yet Triangular And quadrature cores), and today dual-cores remain the option for the cash bucket or those who do not need large processing power.