What gigahertz will we be at in 2027

2 t. intel

>>62144197
Between 4 and 5 GHz.

>>62144197
4GHz ARM CPUs

>>62144197
5ghz

based 1nm

about 8 GHz stock thanks to graphene, almost 10 GHz with good watercooling, and around 12 or 13 with liquid nitrogen.

>>62144197
between 4 and 5. the answer going forward is more cores.

>>62144197
6-7ghz probably. And 1000 cores.

>>62144197
1000ghz probably. And 6-7 cores.

Unless we can do something about the speed of light, not much faster. The circuits can't get much smaller and it takes time for the electrons to move through the circuit. If the electrons literally can't go through the circuit in the time alloted for the cycle then you can't run the CPU at that clock rate.

gigahertz will be obsolete due to nanotechnology

>>62144197
The gigahertz are running out because we've been using them to losey goosey. We will run out of gigahertz and have to ration them in 2025. No one will be able to use more than 1 gigahertz.

imagine the possiblities, we don't have to worry about boated js-ridden web pages anymore when they run at lightspeed anyway

>>62144197
5.5 @ inferno lake 150W TDP

>>62144251
You can almost count with your fingers how many atoms fit in 1 nm.

with intel 20 ghz 4 core
with amd 4 ghz 20 core

>>62144197
whatever is standard Intel

69 gigahertz

>>62144197
everything will be quantum computer by than. mhz and such are meaningless

Not one mention of heat so far.

Important read:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megahertz_myth

>>62144197
500MHz trillion core cpu

3ghz, but more bits. 256bits @ 3ghz, and we climb back up to 5-6ghz in 2036 where they add more cores, and double the bits, but start at 1-2 ghz again.

>>62144553
>factors such as pipeline depth
We need longer pipelines

>>62144197
3 or 4 niggawats

>>62144564
I'm banking on this one. Bet it will be a fucking brick too. That is... if desktops don't die out from normie abuse.

>>62144305
>We will hit 10GHz by 2010
>We will hit 10GHz by 2027

>>62144412
Ken M?

>>62144197
6000-7000GHz probably and 1 core

File: KL_Intel_i386EX.jpg (124KB, 813x816px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 813x816px

>>62144197
16MHz, single core, QFP format.

I'm rooting for retro-futurism.

clearly we will be in the megahertz with hundreds of cores

Clearly the number of cores will go up, but not to like millions or trillions. We are still stuck with scilicon and the game is going to change from transisters per meter to cores per meter.

We will come up against a core limit just as we've come up against a transistor size limit

>>62144305
Graphene isn't a semiconductor, retard

>>62145434
Since the basic instruction set of x86 is not covered by patents anymore, sooner or later some company will start to manufacture 486-686 level x86 chips for legacy use.

>>62145882
I believe 486 was still being made for embedded hardware in the 2000's.

>>62144428
>inferno lake

>>62144197
5.5. There's no reason to upgrade anymore. If you have a processor made in the last 4 years it will be fully usable for the next 10 years.