Is CPU technology topping out?

[futurefields]

Is CPU technology topping out? I mean as far as the cpu performance itself, not integrated gpu performance or other things like what Haswell is focusing on.

 

[Cerb]

We're well into getting diminished returns. Until some disruptive technology comes along, we'll stay here.

Each thread can only get so much ILP, and most don't have that much. Lower ILP leads to lower potential IPC. the way around this to speed things up. Known ways of doing that are unreasonable, either in production cost, total power consumed, or design cost/complexity (a fully differential CPU aught to do, right?). It gets especially hard since memory is so slow relative to CPUs.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Theoretically speaking, there's still a ways to go with smaller and/or faster process technologies. And BTX, stillborn though it may have been, allowed for much higher-TDP CPUs. The possibilities are out there.

It may take them a while, but I bet Intel will be able to do some pretty amazing things with 11nm tech and a 200w power envelope. What they choose to do will depend on what people want to do with the chips.

Progress does take longer than it used to, though.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Only until the next big thing.

 

[moonbogg]

Yeah I read that we are seeing less performance with current tech and it will take a very different kind of technology to break through this wall. Of course, CPU's will continue to get better for a while, but less of a jump with each new gen.

 

[pantsaregood]

Simply put, no.

Bloomfield had a TDP of 130 W. The Core i7-975, a Bloomfield CPU, ran at 3.33 GHz. A Core i7-2600K or i7-3820 can run at 4.5 GHz (100*45 or 133*34) without breaking that level of power consumption. 35% increase in clock speed and ~12.5% increase in IPC while held at the same level of power consumption. That's a 51.875% increase in performance/watt. That's certainly a huge jump.

Also, the point isn't to compare an overclocked CPU to a stock CPU. An i7-2600K will pull around 130 W maximum under full load when at 4.5 GHz. An i7-975, from what I recall, pushed the 130 W TDP at stock settings.

With Haswell, we can expect another ~12.5% increase in IPC, and the same 19% reduction in power consumption Ivy Bridge brought.

 

[BrightCandle]

At the height of growth we saw not only a doubling of transistors every 18 months but also a doubling of performance. Today we tend to see more like 20% performance but still with a near doubling of transistors. The difference today is that we beginning to get dark transistors were the entire chip can't actually be used all at once, and parts have to turned off to fit within the thermal design.

There doesn't seem to be any technology coming in the short term that solves the problem which likely means its going to stay at reduced progress for a while. Whether the industry is now done growing or not we really can't say but its definitely slowed down to a crawl.

 

[Fjodor2001]

With Haswell, we can expect another ~12.5% increase in IPC, and the same 19% reduction in power consumption Ivy Bridge brought.

How will Haswell be able to reduce TDP by 19% without any node shrink?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Is CPU technology topping out?

Far from, very far from.

 

[pantsaregood]

How will Haswell be able to reduce TDP by 19% without any node shrink?

I mean it will have the same 19% reduction relative to SB. It will run at the same power envelope as IB.

Also, we aren't really slowing down in progress. We've just taken interest in a different kind of progression. TDPs climbed to monsterous amounts from 2004-2008 - there were Phenom II and Core 2 units that pushed 150W.

If Intel and AMD were allowed to work within a 150W TDP in the mainstream space today, they could push performance significantly harder than they do now.

 

[thephew]

What consumer application will ever need more computing power? Most people run web browsers, watch some videos, use Office apps, maybe play some crappy Flash games...

The enterprise market will drive technology innovation, but I think the PC has come as far as it needs to.

 

[cytg111]

Simply put, no.

Bloomfield had a TDP of 130 W. The Core i7-975, a Bloomfield CPU, ran at 3.33 GHz. A Core i7-2600K or i7-3820 can run at 4.5 GHz (100*45 or 133*34) without breaking that level of power consumption. 35% increase in clock speed and ~12.5% increase in IPC while held at the same level of power consumption. That's a 51.875% increase in performance/watt. That's certainly a huge jump.

Also, the point isn't to compare an overclocked CPU to a stock CPU. An i7-2600K will pull around 130 W maximum under full load when at 4.5 GHz. An i7-975, from what I recall, pushed the 130 W TDP at stock settings.

With Haswell, we can expect another ~12.5% increase in IPC, and the same 19% reduction in power consumption Ivy Bridge brought.

I disagree.
Very much so topping out .. think moores law .. you're talking about 12.5% increases where you should be talking about 100%.
It seems like we need to conquor a new parallel programming paradigm before the next fase of 'moore' can proceed.

 

[moonbogg]

What consumer application will ever need more computing power? Most people run web browsers, watch some videos, use Office apps, maybe play some crappy Flash games...

The enterprise market will drive technology innovation, but I think the PC has come as far as it needs to.

Dude, there is ONE thing that drove hardware innovation to where it is today. That one thing is GAMES, period.

 

[cytg111]

Dude, there is ONE thing that drove hardware innovation to where it is today. That one thing is GAMES, period.

and "..play some crappy Flash.." - porn.

 

[philipma1957]

What consumer application will ever need more computing power? Most people run web browsers, watch some videos, use Office apps, maybe play some crappy Flash games...

The enterprise market will drive technology innovation, but I think the PC has come as far as it needs to.

if you can drive a 3840 by 2160 display at top settings for games it is good enough. Soon 2020 or earlier tv's will be at high resolutions.

Right now I don't think cpus /gpus are that good. Once you get to a 8mb pixel display you won't really need better. I use to think they would never be a need for a display at 8mb pixel it will sell.

I have seen 299 dollar 37 and 39 inch 1080 p tvs on a few very good sales. I am thinking tv manufacturers need a good hook better then 3d. a 55 or 70 inch tv with 8mb pixels will come out. Right now an i7 3770k with a pair of good graphics cards in crossfire may be good enough for that tv. So I think more will happen.

The real fad is mobile gear with a cloud in the sky. I think this will not stay hot. But who the f am I to really know whats up by the year 2020 .

 

[pantsaregood]

I disagree.
Very much so topping out .. think moores law .. you're talking about 12.5% increases where you should be talking about 100%.
It seems like we need to conquor a new parallel programming paradigm before the next fase of 'moore' can proceed.

A quad-core Sandy Bridge at 130W is 50% faster than a quad-core Bloomfield at 130W. Moore's law itself only states that the number of integrated circuits on components doubles every year.

An i7-3960X has 2.27 billion transistors. An i7-990X has 1.17 billion. That's a 94% increase - pretty close to what Moore's Law says.

That "law" is more of a self-fulfilling prophecy than anything else. It is generally used as a benchmark for what should be produced.

Moore's law says nothing about lowering power consumption while increasing performance or transistor count by 100%.

 

[thephew]

Dude, there is ONE thing that drove hardware innovation to where it is today. That one thing is GAMES, period.

Intel's market cap is an order of magnitude larger than Activision Blizzard or EA. Games barely move the needle of Intel's market strategy. Hardcore PC gamers are a tiny tiny tiny niche market compared to console gamers and casual PC gamers, and the entire gaming industry isn't even a blip compared to mainstream consumer and enterprise computing.

Intel makes their revenue from <$500 Dells/HPs/etc, and makes their profit from the server market.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

If Intel and AMD were allowed to work within a 150W TDP in the mainstream space today, they could push performance significantly harder than they do now.

They are . Haswell-E will have up to a 160 watt TDP.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/intel-haswell-ep-brings-ddr4-to-eat-up-to-160w-190-amps/16141.html

 

[pantsaregood]

160W? That's doubtlessly an 8C/16T unit, if not more. Eight-core SB-E at 2.7 GHz only pushes 130W.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Oh man, poor AMD.

Intel doesn't even consider them competition anymore

However in a crazy turnabout, they're now focused on Nvidia, lolwut!

The main competitor for Haswell-EP will not be AMD with their unannounced successor of the yet unannounced Abu Dhabi Server CPU (confused yet?), it will be a combination of NVIDIA Maxwell GPU paired with an Project Denver-based Server CPU.

 

[pelov]

They are . Haswell-E will have up to a 160 watt TDP.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/intel-haswell-ep-brings-ddr4-to-eat-up-to-160w-190-amps/16141.html

That's not mainstream. That's the workstation platform and the chips will cost you $500-$1000.

 

[Phynaz]

What consumer application will ever need more computing power? Most people run web browsers, watch some videos, use Office apps, maybe play some crappy Flash games...

The enterprise market will drive technology innovation, but I think the PC has come as far as it needs to.

640k ought to be enough for anybody.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

That's not mainstream. That's the workstation platform and the chips will cost you $500-$1000.

So what? This will be an enthusiast CPU on an enthusiast platform. A 160w TDP doesn't belong and would not work on the mainstream platform. Think of the pin count and power delivery.

 

[jhu]

What consumer application will ever need more computing power? Most people run web browsers, watch some videos, use Office apps, maybe play some crappy Flash games...

Hmm... That's what people have been saying every year since at least 1995 if not earlier. And you'll be saying the same thing in 2020, while finding your computer from 2012 inadequate and wondering how you ever got by with such antiquated technology.

 

[pelov]

If Intel and AMD were allowed to work within a 150W TDP in the mainstream space today

Not if you were reading his quote

So what? This will be an enthusiast CPU on an enthusiast platform. A 160w TDP doesn't belong and would not work on the mainstream platform. Think of the pin count and power delivery.

Mainstream does not equal workstation. Enthusiast does not equal workstation either. Workstation is just that... workstation.