45nm versus 65nm

D

Denamian

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
198
I know that this thread might be moved by a mod to one of the processing forums, but since my question is not really specific to either AMD or Intel chips, I decided to put it out here in general for the time being.

I'm decently tech savvy: I've built several of my own rigs, I understand the basics of architecture for most of the major computer parts, etc.

However, I have not been able to make heads nor tails of this processing issue. Pretty much everything I can find on the subject is either mind-numbingly detailed, or way overly simplistic.

I was just wondering if there was any chance that someone could point me in the direction of a guide that does a decent job of explaining what exactly the real-world performance differences are between the two.

Or in lieu of that... if someone could sit down for a few minutes and tap out an answer for me here if nobody has a link to a handy dandy walk through.

Thanks a million!
 
With Core 2 CPUs, it's fairly simple. 45nm Core 2 chips have a 10-15% performance per clock increase on average compared to the older 65nm variants. This is due to several architectural improvements made during the transition. They also have slightly increased cache, so they'll perform better in I/O intensive applications.

Another thing is SSE4.1. In applications that support it, performance can improve by quite a bit. It's been a while since I actually looked at a Penryn review, but I believe the benefits can be as high as 30%, if not more. However, there aren't too many programs that will actually get anything from it, although it's still something to keep in mind.

The last major real-world benefit is overclocking. Whereas 65nm CPUs typically top out at around 3.6GHz with top-end air cooling, the 45nm variants can often reach 3.6-3.8GHz on stock volts, and without being FSB or multiplier-limited, speeds of around and above 4GHz are common.

Those are basically the main points. Nowadays, when it comes to dual-core CPUs there's really no reason to go with a 65nm version, considering the E8400 is under $200 and the E7200 as a budget chip can be easily overclocked to a level where it would spank even the fastest stock Conroe, even with the stock heatsink. Plus, the E5200 is coming out soon, which should cost around $100, if not less, and will probably also be a monster overclocker (stock multiplier of 12.5). Quads are a different story though. Right now, there are no 45nm C2Qs that can compete in the sub-$200 price range that the Q6600 now occupies. The decision between a Q6600 and a Q9450, Q9550, Q9300, or Q9650 is really a matter of budget.
 
Denamian said:
I know that this thread might be moved by a mod to one of the processing forums, but since my question is not really specific to either AMD or Intel chips, I decided to put it out here in general for the time being.

I'm decently tech savvy: I've built several of my own rigs, I understand the basics of architecture for most of the major computer parts, etc.

However, I have not been able to make heads nor tails of this processing issue. Pretty much everything I can find on the subject is either mind-numbingly detailed, or way overly simplistic.

I was just wondering if there was any chance that someone could point me in the direction of a guide that does a decent job of explaining what exactly the real-world performance differences are between the two.

Or in lieu of that... if someone could sit down for a few minutes and tap out an answer for me here if nobody has a link to a handy dandy walk through.

Thanks a million!
Click to expand...


All the die shrink does is make the processor cheaper to produce, cooler, and require less voltage.

usually this is all it would be, slightly better temps + 10 bucks less. However, when intel launched their 45nm chips, they also released the high-k and metal gates. These were huge changes in how intel produced their chips and lead to far cooler and efficient processors. this is why 45nm chips are considered such a big deal, if it was a usual die-shrink i doubt many people would really take notice (ex. die shrinks in GPUs, slightly cooler and equal performance).

The bottom line is.. the reason why 45nm processors are so popular and hyped is not the die shrink itself, but the other technologies that just happened to come along with the die shrink.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top