Check it out here: http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT082610181333

Kantor is very very smart. You would almost think that hes the smartest and most capable person here, at least until Alephnul gets off his butt and starts posting again.

In many respects, the evolution of mainstream x86 microprocessors over the last 10-15 years has been very consistent, steady and gradual, with a few exceptions. Since the advent of their first out-of-order designs, both AMD and Intel have been using very similar microarchitectures throughout successive generations. The notable exception is Intel’s Pentium 4, which proved to be poorly suited for most of the market. That aside, the heritage of AMD’s designs is very clearly descended from the K7 generation, while Intel’s microarchitectures are derived from the Pentium Pro. AMD and Intel both focused on the same initial design goals: maximal single threaded performance given reasonable manufacturing costs. Around 2003, the additional constraint of power efficiency became essential - both to accommodate affordable cooling solutions, electrical delivery and also the rise of notebooks. While this change (amongst other things) doomed the Pentium 4, the challenges of power efficiency were mostly met by continuous improvements rather than radical departures. The x86 ecosystem is largely ruled by two microarchitectures, Intel’s Nehalem and AMD’s Istanbul (for simplicitly we use Istanbul to refer to all of Family 10h). Together these two designs span the entire PC market from 10W notebooks to 130W servers, with a third for the somewhat different ultra-low power market (Intel’s Atom).

And more from the source.

KANTER.... not Kantor....

lol

BTW there are millions of people out there even with the same name its not granted that both persons are identical.

And : Knowledge about CPU Architecture doesnt always equal intelligence. It can indicate intelligence.

Does anyone know how fast the computer processor technology is moving? A couple of years ago, I was told by a friend with a Bachelor's in Engineering that computers 2 years old are actually 5 to 10 years old in comparison to the new technology.

Second, with the ongoing rapid evolution of computer technology, is it self sustainable meaning will it be able to be priced down to a reasonable level, in a possible 10 year US and global recession starting with the onset of the mortgage crisis in 2007, in order to have an acceptable market entry price?

Finally, what is the point of a company putting out new and better products year-after-year if their traditional customer base(s) is shrinking to a degree where it makes the price for the product in their emerging economies customer base too much?

In simpler terms, are Intel, AMD and the like letting the tech nerds drive the products to a point where the company is constantly getting too much ahead of themselves in putting out products that no one will be able to afford brand new?

very interesting read thanks for the link.

Your friend was spinning a tall tale.

Is the technology improvement sustainable? In one word, yes. We are constantly finding new uses for the technology we create. If you were to impose a 2010 level of technology in the form of an Intel Core i7 laptop on the world in 1980 with their level of understanding of the possibilities of computing you would have to forgive them if they said that the world would need very few computers just like that one.

Whats the point in the better products? Well if they don't make them someone else will. Thats how competition works. In any case like above they have never fallen afoul of these trends because the market size and potential of computing has increased at a faster pace than the prices have been coming down.

Who?

Kantor.

What are you trying to say?

Will this beat Sandy's Bridge?

I knew there had to be some mistake. Most ridiculous thread title ever.