Curious: Fastest processor (GHz) these days?

[IHateMyJob2004]

I'm somewhat curious. What is the fastest processor these days in terms of GHz? Both by Intel and AMD?

I'm just out of the loop and curious. Just stock speeds, no overclocking.

If you lead me to water, I can read up more on the chip.

And for kicks, what would the fastest memory be for each offering, Intel and AMD respectively?

 

[techforums]

980x

 

[extra]

Nahhh on the 980x...though the 980x is certainly the fastest client chip (by a good bit) he was asking for the highest ghz rating:

I think it's the i5 680. It's a 3.6ghz stock cpu. Still, not as fast ghz wise as the old 3.8ghz p4 .

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

980x

3.6GHz on 6 cores. Not bad.

Seems like the days of increasing GHz are over. Do any roadmap items by Intel or AMD say that 20%+ GHz increases on on the way?

 

[techforums]

Nahhh on the 980x...though the 980x is certainly the fastest client chip (by a good bit) he was asking for the highest ghz rating:

I think it's the i5 680. It's a 3.6ghz stock cpu. Still, not as fast ghz wise as the old 3.8ghz p4 .

I suck then. :'(

 

[extra]

I suck then. :'(

Nahhh.. you tried to answer in a useful manner, I just gave the literal answer I suck too, it's a living, don't worry about it

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

You did answer the question. I'm asking all of this because of single threaded applkication concerns.

To go on from here .....
A P4 at 3.8 GHz probably is slower performance wise than an i5 680 at 3.6 GHz because of the system memory it would get mated with, correct? The overall architecture of the i5 chipsets should be superior unless I am missing something.

How fast did AMD ever get?

 

[Sp12]

Not just the ram, but the architecture. I wouldn't be surprised if an i5 is a good 4x as fast as an equivalent P4.

 

[Markfw]

You did answer the question. I'm asking all of this because of single threaded applkication concerns.

To go on from here .....
A P4 at 3.8 GHz probably is slower performance wise than an i5 680 at 3.6 GHz because of the system memory it would get mated with, correct? The overall architecture of the i5 chipsets should be superior unless I am missing something.

How fast did AMD ever get?

I don't have the exact stats, but the P4 @3.8 is slower than an Atom @1.6 I think. They are 2-4 times slower per clock.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Well, in that regard, is the 980x at 3.3Ghz as good as it gets for single threaded app performane or would the i5 be better real world performance wise?

 

[extra]

The 980x is faster, the i5 has a crappy memory controller in comparison, and less cache.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

The 980x is faster, the i5 has a crappy memory controller in comparison, and less cache.

This has been an interesting discussion. It's amazing what can be learned in a short time period.

Much appreciated,
IHMJ'04

 

[nenforcer]

Intel and AMD both have ceded the gigahertz race to IBM, which has had POWER series 6 running at 5GHz at 65nm back in 2007. Power 7 was just announced earlier this year as well.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Intel and AMD both have ceded the gigahertz race to IBM, which has had POWER series 6 running at 5GHz at 65nm back in 2007. Power 7 was just announced earlier this year as well.

Is that RISC, x86, etc?

EDIT: RISC

 

[cusideabelincoln]

I don't have the exact stats, but the P4 @3.8 is slower than an Atom @1.6 I think. They are 2-4 times slower per clock.

I really hope you mean Core 2 and not Atom. P4 would destroy the Atom.

 

[khon]

I really hope you mean Core 2 and not Atom. P4 would destroy the Atom.

True, the P4 does beat the Atom by a fair margin when comparing single-threaded applications, though it can't keep up with a dual core atom in most cases: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/atom-d510-pentium-4-nettop,2649.html

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

I really hope you mean Core 2 and not Atom. P4 would destroy the Atom.

It depends on the clock speed of the P4, but that architecture wasn't that great even when it was competing against K8. A 3.6GHz Core i5 would completely destroy a 3.8GHz P4, even on single-threaded performance.

 

[Ben90]

I don't have the exact stats, but the P4 @3.8 is slower than an Atom @1.6 I think. They are 2-4 times slower per clock.

Atoms are pretty slow, clock for clock they are slightly slower than a P4.

Currently the fastest GHz processor being manufactured is the Clarkdale 670. It has a base clockspeed of 3.46 and a max turbo of 3.76. Funny enough the fastest GHz processor of all time was the P4 670.

On AMD's side we have the fastest turbo with the 1090T at 3.6GHz. The fastest base processor is the P2 965 that runs at 3.4.

 

[khon]

Currently the fastest GHz processor being manufactured is the Clarkdale 670. It has a base clockspeed of 3.46 and a max turbo of 3.76. Funny enough the fastest GHz processor of all time was the P4 670.

Actually there's an i5-680, which goes up to 3.87GHz with turbo, making it the fastest stock x86 processor ever.

 

[cbn]

I'm somewhat curious. What is the fastest processor these days in terms of GHz? Both by Intel and AMD?

I'm just out of the loop and curious. Just stock speeds, no overclocking.

If you lead me to water, I can read up more on the chip.

And for kicks, what would the fastest memory be for each offering, Intel and AMD respectively?

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2368260,00.asp

Well its not AMD or Intel, but IBM recently released information on a 5.2 Ghz CPU.

 

[MrPickins]

I really hope you mean Core 2 and not Atom. P4 would destroy the Atom.

QFT

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/93?vs=110

 

[JimmiG]

I guess in an alternate reality, it would have been the new 10 GHz Intel CPUs:
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/intel-predicts-10ghz-chips-by-2011-20000726/

 

[MrPickins]

I guess in an alternate reality, it would have been the new 10 GHz Intel CPUs:
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/intel-predicts-10ghz-chips-by-2011-20000726/

The comments for that article are priceless.

Woo… 10 GHZ. Even if this was referring to our Current 2D “Neanderthal” model of processing it's far too pawltry to give 'props to.

By 2011 we will have implementation of Quantum Processing that will make the xHZ debate look like the colonists debating over sucession from the UK.

 

[aigomorla]

X5687 coming out.

Stock should be simular to the 650 on the gulftown steppings, but a quadcore.

I guess in an alternate reality, it would have been the new 10 GHz Intel CPUs:
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/intel-predicts-10ghz-chips-by-2011-20000726/

I think they implied it this way.

Single core 10ghz... can be scaled down and divided though cores.. although not true, but this is what they intended.

So a typical i7 920 @ 2.66 has 4 cores... 2.66 x 4 = 10.4ghz! :O
My 980X which is @ 4.25 has 6 cores = 25.5 ghz!!

OF course we cant use that... but in 2000 when that article was written i think they assumed this.

 

[Chapbass]

I guess in an alternate reality, it would have been the new 10 GHz Intel CPUs:
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/intel-predicts-10ghz-chips-by-2011-20000726/

Lol, great to read the comments:

Pentium XXIV (3:58pm EST Wed Jul 26 2000)
I'll be waiting in line at CompUSA.