Pictures of Intel's McKinley Surface. Details Too.

[AGodspeed]

For pics, go here

And Intel claims McKinleys in the future will run at .13 micron and at 5GHz at normal room temperature, because of the low power circuits it will use.

 

[Random Variable]

Well, I guess it can't be any worse than the original Itanium.

 

[Budman]

<< And Intel claims McKinleys in the future will run at .13 micron and at 5GHz at normal room temperature, because of the low power circuits it will use. >>




5GHz at normal room temperature :Q:Q:Q:Q:Q:Q:Q

 

[Agent004]

<< Well, I guess it can't be any worse than the original Itanium. >>



I don't think PM will allow that to happen

I kind of 'know' it's quite powerful, that's why I am surprise at AMD's projection at Clawhammer at 3400+ is more powerful.

 

[AGodspeed]

<<

<< And Intel claims McKinleys in the future will run at .13 micron and at 5GHz at normal room temperature, because of the low power circuits it will use. >>




5GHz at normal room temperature :Q:Q:Q:Q:Q:Q:Q >>



Yeah I know, sounds really awesome. Unfortunately, I'm guessing Intel is referring to their new SOI process, which won't surface for years and years. It's still pretty cool though.

 

[insdav3]

yeah but amd's 3ghz processors will probably out bench them....haha

 

[Diable]

I doubt it.

 

[WilsonTung]

<< yeah but amd's 3ghz processors will probably out bench them....haha >>


Wrong. Itanium and IA-64 are built to do lots of work each clock cycle but operate on a lower clock frequency. This is the opposite of the Pentium 4, which can scale to extremely high clock speeds but does less per clock.

Somehow I doubt that McKinley will reach 5 GHz. An 8 stage pipeline is just insufficient using today's techniques. The 5 GHz demonstration is on some sort of ALU, not the McKinley itself.

This is hype.

 

[Lord Evermore]

1.5 to 2 times Itanium speed. So...half the crappiness?

 

[BeauJangles]

<< 1.5 to 2 times Itanium speed. So...half the crappiness? >>