@lonzo for mvp They're literally talking about CPUs that already exist, such as Skylake-X, along with any high core count CPUs in both mainstream and enterprise applications
Also keep in mind that, with a 4.2 GHz CPU, electricity can only travel ±3.5cm during a single cycle. Factor for the time demanded by capacitance and latency, and you're lucky to traverse a single cm during a complete processor cycle. The AMD Zen 3 8-core die is 1.29 x 0.964 cm, with the shared 0.7cm² cache flanked by 0.3cm-wide CPU cores - keeping most operations within 0.6cm in order to obtain reliable operations at the rated 4.7GHz boost speed. Prior to ±2000, CPU clock speeds were doubling roughly every 2-3 years: ~ 1982 : (1.5 μm) 80286 @ 6 MHz; 68000 @ 8 MHz ~ 1985 : (1.5 μm) 80386 @ 12 MHz; 68020 @ 16 MHz ~ 1989 : (1.0 μm) 80486 @ 25 MHz; 68040 @ 30 MHz ~ 1993 : (800 nm) Pentium @ 60 MHz; 68060 @ 55 MHz ~ 1995 : (500 nm) Pentium Pro @ 120 MHz; PowerPC 603/604 @ 120 MHz ~ 1997 : (350 nm) Pentium II @ 260 MHz; PowerPC 750 @ 260 MHz ~ 1999 : (250 nm) Pentium III, Athlon, PowerPC 7400 @ 600 MHz ~ 2001 : (180 nm) Pentium 4, Athlon XP @ 1.2 GHz ~ 2005 : (90 nm) Pentium D, Athlon 64 X2 @ 2.4 GHz By 2005, CPU manufacturers were already approaching the physical limits of semiconductor technology and it took roughly a decade to refine manufacturing sufficiently (down to 32-10 nm; 7 nm for Zen2/3) to reliably deliver ±4.8 GHz on consumer-grade CPUs.
@@michaelmoran9020 More or less; in the general vicinity; approximately. While it *is* possible to push greater speeds, the higher voltages required test the material limits of semiconductors. In the later 2000s, some enthusiasts were pushing 8GHz on their CPUs but they had to use insane voltages to do it (as well as freon-based coolers to keep the CPUs from melting into slag). One approach from the late 1980s and early 1990s was 'split CPUs' - kind of the predecessors of today's multicore CPUs. I forget the specific mechanism (it's kinda been a while) but the "SX" variants (as opposed to the 'normal' "DX" models) used CPUs with double the architecture of the rest of the system - ie using a 32-bit CPU in a 16-bit computer so it could carry out two instructions every cycle vs just one. My personal favorite was the Atari ST line (literally S[ixteen]T[hirtytwo]) - one side of the CPU did normal CPU stuff while the other side handled all the internal functions like I/O. Coupled with the "Blitter" chip, it was essentially the first mass market home computer with a discrete GPU. (Pretty much all other home computers of the era relied on the CPU for graphics.)
I don't think you know what ± means, I think you mean to use ~ for "roughly" or "around" ± means "plus or minus" so ±2 means "+2 or -2" and I don't think you're trying to say CPUs have negative clock speeds right?
IMO a decent mini-series for this channel would be the the "Top 5 advancements in X" series. Like the Top 5 advancements in videocard history. The Top 5 advancements in display technology. The Top 5 advancements in PC case design. The Top 5 advancements in water bottle technology... You get the idea.
You forgot to mention that's also about path length between elements. Longer paths mean more time electrons have to travel… which uses more power and takes precious pico-seconds (that later adds together).
I was actually wondering about this exact topic a few days ago. Didn't even google it or say it loud (you know Google's love for their users' microphones) and here it is. Thanks guys!
It still blows my freaking mind that we spin giant magnets really fast to make a really, really, *really* long string of high and low signals to represent information we want to convey.
Part of the problem is the speed of light (or actually, the speed of propagation of electricity in silicon, which is some significant fraction of the speed of light). At 4 GHz, light can only travel about 7.5 cm. A processor can be thought of as a maze of tiny wires (obviously, a massive simplification), so in each clock cycle, the signal can only zig zag through up to 7.5 cm of that maze. The "maze" is folded in on itself, so the signal doesn't just go from one end of the chip directly to the other. So the larger you make your chip, the longer it takes for a signal to get from one side to the other.
Thanks for the video! I've always wondered this. Also, I loved Linus' panicked segue to the sponsor at the end 😂 3:38 Linus: "Speaking of... uh" *crap this isn't going to work* "SEGUE TO OUR SPONSOR!!!" 🤣🤣
I’ve just always wondered why they don’t include bigger caches. There’s so many “updates” the seem to just add a little more cache which makes one wonder why they didn’t in the first place. It’s not a big change that would dramatically reduce yield or increase price.
Or think about it this way: In copper, electric signals travel at around 10cm per nanosecond. At 5Ghz clockrate, or 5 ticks per nanosecond, an electric signal travels only 2cm before the next one is sent. Try keeping that all synced up...
This video would be so much better if he got into the limitations of light speed on the clock frequencies of large chips, and how heat transfer scales poorly with size.
@@tim3172 Well after googling, I'm half right, It has Only 4 Logical Modules With 2 cores each, There are 2 modes for core frequencies all cores on max and also a mod with only half when Temperature get high.. So eh
I read a research being done for this they had a prototype made by a small group of professionals.. the size of the cpus reached the size of a laptop screen.. or rather a size of a full wafer.. this was mainly done for deep learning purpose to help with linear algebraic calculations performed to be faster
I know these shorts videos are supposed to be kinda of like a crash course on a topic, but IMO this one creates a lot of unnecessary confusion. The video can't seem to make up its mind on whether 'CPU Size' means die size or package size, and while the underlying information is (mostly) factual, it does a meager job of separating the two concepts.
he answered the question without having to go into that great of detail. i wouldnt mind learning what you are suggesting but i feel the video was good enough since it proposed a question and gave a solid answer in a short enough video as to not lose your attention.
To take your engine analogy to another level. A sports car with a Large bore V8 or V10 if done right cant be out performed by a small cubic inch or liter 4 or 6 cylinder. Depends on how they are built and what the motors are intended to do. A 6 cylinder Nissan from the 1990s can out run a Camaro from the same era. But the same motors in a truck application the V8 driving the camaro will out tow or haul the V6. Components on motors as well as what they are in is a HUGE deciding factor to what we buy in the automotive world.
The way all Linus media group channels handle the "SEGWAY TO OUR SPONSOR" is about my favorite. I really appreciate the overt "hey, they paid for this, we don't always have a good way to work them in, here it is" approach. Fast and direct.
The video left out one important detail: there is also a hard limit on how big the chips can be made, which is called the 'reticle limit'. I believe the reticle limit for 7nm TSMC is somewhere around 850mm2. By comparison the largest consumer GPU chip (GA102, used in RTX 3090 / 3080) is 628mm2.
Why can't I use more cpus then one for single pc like 4 or 8 or 10? I know about pronlems on managing tasks and distributing work After we come up with solutions for that Is there any other big concern ?
Well... How about a macro version of the "Big/little" design? You could have a slower multiple core processor that can take care of more mundane system tasks & I/O, maybe another slightly faster multicore one that can do some of the more strenuous multi-core stuff, like encoding & decoding, and an optional slot, with a high frequency low core count processor that could be used exclusively for gaming or for sharing loads with the other processors? Each could be specialized & optimized for specific tasks. That way, the cooling could be distributed, and the slower cores wouldn't share the heat with the higher frequency cores. Maybe, only the top two tiered processors would need access to the video card.
The single most limiting factor is the transit time, which make clock frequency lower for a bigger die. Some of you can recall the Pentium II cartridge processor, with the core running at 400 MHz. It had the cache memory installed on the same cartridge, but not onboard the chip, running at 200 MHz. Smaller the transistors size, smaller che chip, higher the clock frequency. Now Apple started a trend, with a relatively low computing power CPU, the M1, but with the instruction set highly optimised toward the applications, and the results are excellent. But only with their applications built with their compiler with their programming structure. The x86 can run any software written in any language with a variety of compilers.
You heard the man: Bigger isn't always better
*cough cough* cocc
that's why my wife is still with me :D
69 likes
wrong bigger is better if you have nitrogen
@@masternobody1896 no ur
"bigger isn't always better"
Threadripper owner: is this some kind of peasant joke I am too rich to understand?
cries in poor
For different type of workloads same time Yes and No.. The path of node from elements of a circuit are getting smaller..
Me with a 20 inch pp: is this some virgin joke im too chad too understand?
Was thinking the same, but even TR is using multiple chip(let)s, it just has a huge heat spreader
@Deo Vindice upgrades people, we need upgrades
I'm open to suggestions for memes
"Bigger isn't always better"
This gives me hope.
Lmao damn
And still the uninformed people want to bigger package, it's why they watched this video, right ? ;-)
Wtf dude 😂😂😂 you are talking about something else
Me too
ooh i know where you going to mean to
I’m sorry, I just can’t imagine being named “Ben Benson”
My town had a guy a long time ago named Andrew A Anderson. And another named John J Johnson. Pretty common names, but yes, just why? So unoriginal.
This would be one of the most serious entries in the top ten if 4chan voted for someone's name
The name's Ben, but you can call me Mr Ben..
Ben Son of Ben.
Ben Benson is Shirley's youngest sons name from Community
"... and Ben Benson..."
*dear god Ben Benson, it's like my friend John Johnson*
or his friend, Carl Carlson
@@corgiflagler or his cousin, Tom Thompson
Or his other friend, Jack Jackson
Geoff Jeffrey (his uncle)
Or maybe his best friend Sam Samson
This explains why the squares in waffles are so small! Thanks, Linus!
😂😂😂
Lolol
Most wanted answer finally getting it
h
@@user-rj1js3lx9l H
@@Saigonas *h*
H
@@user-rj1js3lx9l r/theletterh
Dammit Linus, you gave intel new ideas to continue using 14nm
Intel: now introfucing, 28nm!
@@GroteGlon 28nm is twice as many nm that 14! So take that AMD!!! /s
@@JR-mk6ow four times as many as 7nm! Who's behind now??? /s
@@TotalInsanity4 with a new Mobo too! Lga 1200 is very old
@lonzo for mvp They're literally talking about CPUs that already exist, such as Skylake-X, along with any high core count CPUs in both mainstream and enterprise applications
It's nice that after 30 something years you're finally able to grow a beard
😂😂😂
But his voice hasn't broken yet 🤔
Comment awarded for the next linus rent video
@@tomasferraz7655 rent video ?
@@jeffdabr2216 'Linus Replies to Mean Comments', rent wasnt the word, im just retardasjdasjkdfhajkdfhdkajsdfa
Also keep in mind that, with a 4.2 GHz CPU, electricity can only travel ±3.5cm during a single cycle. Factor for the time demanded by capacitance and latency, and you're lucky to traverse a single cm during a complete processor cycle. The AMD Zen 3 8-core die is 1.29 x 0.964 cm, with the shared 0.7cm² cache flanked by 0.3cm-wide CPU cores - keeping most operations within 0.6cm in order to obtain reliable operations at the rated 4.7GHz boost speed.
Prior to ±2000, CPU clock speeds were doubling roughly every 2-3 years:
~ 1982 : (1.5 μm) 80286 @ 6 MHz; 68000 @ 8 MHz
~ 1985 : (1.5 μm) 80386 @ 12 MHz; 68020 @ 16 MHz
~ 1989 : (1.0 μm) 80486 @ 25 MHz; 68040 @ 30 MHz
~ 1993 : (800 nm) Pentium @ 60 MHz; 68060 @ 55 MHz
~ 1995 : (500 nm) Pentium Pro @ 120 MHz; PowerPC 603/604 @ 120 MHz
~ 1997 : (350 nm) Pentium II @ 260 MHz; PowerPC 750 @ 260 MHz
~ 1999 : (250 nm) Pentium III, Athlon, PowerPC 7400 @ 600 MHz
~ 2001 : (180 nm) Pentium 4, Athlon XP @ 1.2 GHz
~ 2005 : (90 nm) Pentium D, Athlon 64 X2 @ 2.4 GHz
By 2005, CPU manufacturers were already approaching the physical limits of semiconductor technology and it took roughly a decade to refine manufacturing sufficiently (down to 32-10 nm; 7 nm for Zen2/3) to reliably deliver ±4.8 GHz on consumer-grade CPUs.
Wow awesome comment
So basically, the bottleneck of pretty much all industries is still material science
What do you mean by +- in this context?
@@michaelmoran9020 More or less; in the general vicinity; approximately.
While it *is* possible to push greater speeds, the higher voltages required test the material limits of semiconductors. In the later 2000s, some enthusiasts were pushing 8GHz on their CPUs but they had to use insane voltages to do it (as well as freon-based coolers to keep the CPUs from melting into slag).
One approach from the late 1980s and early 1990s was 'split CPUs' - kind of the predecessors of today's multicore CPUs. I forget the specific mechanism (it's kinda been a while) but the "SX" variants (as opposed to the 'normal' "DX" models) used CPUs with double the architecture of the rest of the system - ie using a 32-bit CPU in a 16-bit computer so it could carry out two instructions every cycle vs just one.
My personal favorite was the Atari ST line (literally S[ixteen]T[hirtytwo]) - one side of the CPU did normal CPU stuff while the other side handled all the internal functions like I/O. Coupled with the "Blitter" chip, it was essentially the first mass market home computer with a discrete GPU. (Pretty much all other home computers of the era relied on the CPU for graphics.)
I don't think you know what ± means, I think you mean to use ~ for "roughly" or "around"
± means "plus or minus" so ±2 means "+2 or -2" and I don't think you're trying to say CPUs have negative clock speeds right?
When he gave the car engine metaphor all i heard was "bring the V10s back to F1!"
I want to see W16s for the fun of it
Plane engines
I'm pretty sure they switched back to V10s once they realised that they were able to get the same amount of power out of turbocharged V4s
@@zahidurrashid2407 i legit want to see that bugatti engine slapped into like a polo or golf
@@zahidurrashid2407 look up 50s f1 then
“Bigger isn’t always better”
Yeah, Linus.
Flat is justice. That's why CPUs are flat.
@@Syuvinya ah yes a man of culture but also threadripper
@@kyrim1094 Threadripper is still flat
@@Syuvinya true but are the anime girls flat
@@kyrim1094 loli
Even if Linus ends up ditching the beard, he should keep that haircut
Imo I don't think the hair would look as good without the beard tho
Noooo daddy Linus must stay
1:00
Its finally a sensible haircut without an overdoes of disgustihg gel
I'm not ready for Linus to ditch that beard don't even talk about it fam. I don't need that kind of negativity in my life. xD
IMO a decent mini-series for this channel would be the the "Top 5 advancements in X" series.
Like the Top 5 advancements in videocard history.
The Top 5 advancements in display technology.
The Top 5 advancements in PC case design.
The Top 5 advancements in water bottle technology... You get the idea.
"Visit LTTstore to get yours today" 😂😂
You forgot to mention that's also about path length between elements. Longer paths mean more time electrons have to travel… which uses more power and takes precious pico-seconds (that later adds together).
Do a fast as possible on the FINFET manufacturing process
Y Same
Yes , please
GOOD point, let’s hope for that one. (:
finfet superfin gaafet Ωfet mosfet
FINFET? That old technology? It is going to be all about GAAFET. What is gate-all-around transistor.
Title should have been: "Does size matter?"
that might increase clicks when they're given an impression on the recommended page, but would probably hurt watch time and search-ability
Lmfaoooooooo
-or stamina
Stamina matters ;)
@@NNonsense let’s be honest: no one searched for this
Last time I was this early, the only folding phone was the iPhone 6 Plus
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Flip, flop, fly
*Motorola StarTAC
techlogy is limit to size now... but yet agian.. what you plan to do with all that power? time travel?
ターツ it’s a bot, this is becoming a big problem in RUclips, report the channel as well as the comment
ok, then why not smaller?
Already they are that ARM CPU
@@sk3018?
@@fuzzydark1395They're smartphone CPUs
@@nxx99 his reply made no sense, that’s what my “?” was for..
@@fuzzydark1395 I know what he meant, the comment's grammar was just busted.
0:03, no Linus, not arguably. We all know RGB is the most important
NEVER! RAHHHHH!
I was actually wondering about this exact topic a few days ago. Didn't even google it or say it loud (you know Google's love for their users' microphones) and here it is. Thanks guys!
Bro I used to think about it a lot
Na you are being experimneted on by googles throttling and propaganda obfuscation algorithms /s
Michiel van Erven irk
Don't you know mind reading is in beta?
Note : that's a joke
I'm old enough to remember Intel Pentium 2s looking like SNES cartridges.
Still have one lying around.
But the size of the CPU was almost the same as the modern ones. Everything else was the board and the cooler.
The actual CPU is that postage stamp size chip inside that SNES like cartridge. (The other chip was off die cache.)
That was my first CPU and I thought it looked cool and unique, more than today's ones.
Kinda makes me wonder why did they not do the same with NVMe sockets. Wouldn't mounting them like RAM make them more space efficient?
Now do "Why don't phone companies make thicker phones for better battery life?" (maybe work on the title)
Because mainstream thinks slim phones are "sexy". Apple went thin, so everybody feels they have to follow them for maximum profit.
They do? Even the iPhones have gotten fatter since the 6.
Bigger battery costs more that's why
laughs in Blackview BV9500 and it's thick 11A battery
@@obedulloa6219 11A? u mean 11AH?
People: “americans should use metric”
Americans: “a cpu measures 3 post it stamps”
LinusMediaGroup is Canadian lol (if you just came across this video and aren't a regular viewer, Techquickie is a part of LMG)
@@spiraldj Still part of the American continent
@@leonro Yes but in the context you were speaking Americans almost always refers to the United States, not the continent
@@spiraldj Fair point but a lot of Canadians seem to use imperial units as well (at least informally).
@@amirulazizol844 Oh yeah, don't get me wrong, I get that, but I'm just saying it wasn't clear you were talking Canadians
Ben Benson sounds like a fake email
Basically, this channel was made about your 2 am can't sleep thoughts
With white background with dark images & sudden light
on the screen.
Pillowthoughts
1:21am but close enough
It’s 1:58 am and I chose not to sleep rn
Exactly 2pm ngl
Finally linus failed to deliver a smooth segue.....😂
Linus: Imagine if a CPU was bigger
Me: still have nightmares with Slot-A CPUs
Cerebras.
Better never look at a GPU then.
Slot 1 too :)
No way someone called their kid “ben benson”
I once knew a guy named Rocco Racco.
My friend’s name is Bark Simpson, the dad wanted to name him Bart after Bart Simpson but the mom wasn’t haven’t any of that so they went with bark
@@illpunchyouintheface9094 That's ruff.
@@illpunchyouintheface9094 bahahaha he got bullied
Ben Dozen.
Pun intended
It still blows my freaking mind that we spin giant magnets really fast to make a really, really, *really* long string of high and low signals to represent information we want to convey.
The question that I never know existed in my mind has been answered, thank you linus
Smooth sponsor transition as always.
"Whats your name?"
"Ben,
Ben Benzor."
Ben Ben Ben Benzor
Linus: "bigger isn't always better"
my Ex: i'll pretend i didn't hear that
Part of the problem is the speed of light (or actually, the speed of propagation of electricity in silicon, which is some significant fraction of the speed of light). At 4 GHz, light can only travel about 7.5 cm. A processor can be thought of as a maze of tiny wires (obviously, a massive simplification), so in each clock cycle, the signal can only zig zag through up to 7.5 cm of that maze. The "maze" is folded in on itself, so the signal doesn't just go from one end of the chip directly to the other. So the larger you make your chip, the longer it takes for a signal to get from one side to the other.
so it will decrease the performance speed
vsauce: but who is "they"?
*vsauce music starts*
sInO
Thanks for the video! I've always wondered this. Also, I loved Linus' panicked segue to the sponsor at the end 😂
3:38 Linus: "Speaking of... uh" *crap this isn't going to work* "SEGUE TO OUR SPONSOR!!!" 🤣🤣
I see you, LTT @ 0:14. Using Canadian, American, and Panamanian stamps - your top 3 audiences! Pretty clever!
Panama is their third largest viewer? Bro how isn’t panama like less than 10 Million people? are like half of all panamans watching Ltt? 😂😂
@@gulapula apparently
Thanks for the short video. I was just about to write "this could have been a chatgpt query and closed in 1 min" but you got to the point right away
Possibly the most interesting Techquickie I’ve seen!
I stare at my motherboards all day long, Linus. I love admiring the efficiency.
Ben Benson is crazy. 0:38
Hey Linus....Your mother called, wants to know why she goes straight to voicemail .
Rtx voice speaking..... HOW CAN I HELP YOU!!!
I’ve just always wondered why they don’t include bigger caches. There’s so many “updates” the seem to just add a little more cache which makes one wonder why they didn’t in the first place. It’s not a big change that would dramatically reduce yield or increase price.
I really don't know why anyone would say Linus's segues aren't good. It's a "so-bad-that-it's-legitimately-good" thing.
Keep it up!
They DO: Threadripper is an example. Notice how big
it is compared to regular am4.
Threadripper is sold 3x less than Ryzen so they make a bigger CPU ,
Was gonna say EPYC
Now this was informative!
Thank you :)
*Linus :* Speaking of...
- " Ah Sh!t here we go again "
I think he ran out of his 1 TB .txt file of sponsor segways
Someone needs to make a compilation of Linus's 'speaking of'
@@garfieldandfriends1 But it's every video lol.
Sh¡t
Or think about it this way:
In copper, electric signals travel at around 10cm per nanosecond.
At 5Ghz clockrate, or 5 ticks per nanosecond, an electric signal travels only 2cm before the next one is sent.
Try keeping that all synced up...
My takeaway from this is that it could definitely be a huge performance boost, but it's too difficult and expensive to really pursue.
all i know is:
the beard works.
I had no idea it was him. Wow
When you get an ad with Linus in it on a Tecquickie video
Linus I literally *just* upgraded please stop giving them ideas.
moral of this video: "bigger =/= better"
This video would be so much better if he got into the limitations of light speed on the clock frequencies of large chips, and how heat transfer scales poorly with size.
Ha, I asked that question so many times to myself.
0:12 Americans will use anything but the metric system
He is Canadian.
@@evernevers5390 Canada is just bing chilling USA
@@youtubehandlesuxshut it kid. He's Canadian.
are you ok?@@stxres
@@stxres “Kid”? What’s his age, if you so confidently call him a “kid”?
"its difficult to produce cpu with more cores and same clock speed"
AMD making FX cpus: iTs DiFfIcUlT tO pRoDuCe cPu WiTh MoRe CorEs
Well not really, FX Cpu Cores run a diffent Speed to keep TDP Down, And most FX Cpu have Only half of the cores are Physical.
@@jackculshaw6492 No... just no... everything you just posted is incorrect.
@@tim3172 Well after googling, I'm half right, It has Only 4 Logical Modules With 2 cores each, There are 2 modes for core frequencies all cores on max and also a mod with only half when Temperature get high.. So eh
Conversely, non-FX CPUs have higher frequencies.
@@wta1518Most of the time yh XD
I read a research being done for this they had a prototype made by a small group of professionals.. the size of the cpus reached the size of a laptop screen.. or rather a size of a full wafer.. this was mainly done for deep learning purpose to help with linear algebraic calculations performed to be faster
Linus: Bigger CPU isn't viable
Intel: OK
Also Intel: *Introduces Alder Lake*
Love how you showed the BMW M5 V10. Brings back so many memories ❤️❤️
Yeah one of my favourite engines bro
@@ASRLawman it's a melody irl too
Rod bearing go brrrr
@@jediael9906 Hey even other engines have this problem. Don't touch my bae S85b50
3:30 - "bigger isn't always better"
Wish she could have said the same
💀
I know these shorts videos are supposed to be kinda of like a crash course on a topic, but IMO this one creates a lot of unnecessary confusion. The video can't seem to make up its mind on whether 'CPU Size' means die size or package size, and while the underlying information is (mostly) factual, it does a meager job of separating the two concepts.
he answered the question without having to go into that great of detail. i wouldnt mind learning what you are suggesting but i feel the video was good enough since it proposed a question and gave a solid answer in a short enough video as to not lose your attention.
0:47 no waaayyy thats a beautiful S85 engine omg omg 😍
3:38......Gotta say, Linus is getting better at doing those sponsor shoutouts..
All the “bigger isn’t always better” jokes are definitely original and creative.
Bigger jokes aren't always better
0:12 Americans trying to use metric.
threadripper: DONT U SEE ME IM RIGHT THERE
Smoothest sponsor transition ever seen ❤️
Haha it is almost suspicious
To take your engine analogy to another level. A sports car with a Large bore V8 or V10 if done right cant be out performed by a small cubic inch or liter 4 or 6 cylinder. Depends on how they are built and what the motors are intended to do. A 6 cylinder Nissan from the 1990s can out run a Camaro from the same era. But the same motors in a truck application the V8 driving the camaro will out tow or haul the V6. Components on motors as well as what they are in is a HUGE deciding factor to what we buy in the automotive world.
1 week later:
Intel introduces 11th gen with 28nm++++++++++++++++++++
can we stop it with the +++joke
Proudly rubbing as$ of linus🤣🤣
@@mrtuvok5578 nah
one month from now:
Intel: 180nm is BACK!
Good thing for getting people from both sides. No bias detected.
Seconded. I like how they purposely talked to both companies this time.
Ben Benson, my greatest rival.
I have always had this question in the back of my head and I knew the answer was "they know something I don't" but now I know the actual answer.
Would have loved if you talked about threadrippers modular design. Seemed to fit the bill just fine.
so, its hard to make, if we made a viable one anyways would that give us the ultimate performance we want?
I had this exact question just now! thank you for answering it.
That Segway to the sponsor was super smooth 😆
segue
The way all Linus media group channels handle the "SEGWAY TO OUR SPONSOR" is about my favorite. I really appreciate the overt "hey, they paid for this, we don't always have a good way to work them in, here it is" approach. Fast and direct.
The video left out one important detail: there is also a hard limit on how big the chips can be made, which is called the 'reticle limit'. I believe the reticle limit for 7nm TSMC is somewhere around 850mm2. By comparison the largest consumer GPU chip (GA102, used in RTX 3090 / 3080) is 628mm2.
3:35
RGB CPUs, obviously
Bigger cpu=bigger rgb tho
Damn, the S85 (Bmw v10 for the m5 e60) engine made it into this video? Like! One of my favourite engines
Yeahh sounds great until it decides to split itself in half lmao
Why can't I use more cpus then one for single pc like 4 or 8 or 10?
I know about pronlems on managing tasks and distributing work
After we come up with solutions for that
Is there any other big concern ?
Well... How about a macro version of the "Big/little" design? You could have a slower multiple core processor that can take care of more mundane system tasks & I/O, maybe another slightly faster multicore one that can do some of the more strenuous multi-core stuff, like encoding & decoding, and an optional slot, with a high frequency low core count processor that could be used exclusively for gaming or for sharing loads with the other processors? Each could be specialized & optimized for specific tasks. That way, the cooling could be distributed, and the slower cores wouldn't share the heat with the higher frequency cores. Maybe, only the top two tiered processors would need access to the video card.
I’ve actually been wondering this. Thanks!
3:38 best segway ever! 😂
"the entire cpu package is only about a size of a couple of postage stamps".... Americans will use anything but a metric
Linus isnt american
@@SmokeAndClickCircles FYI Canada is in America, more specifically in North America
but most of the continent uses metric
@@hitomidiaconchuk5149 most of the world uses metric. It doesnt mean we shouldnt joke about imperial units. Whatever.
Europeans don't know how large washing machines or postage stamps are.
Smartphones: *[laughs in millimeter processors]*
iPhone 12: Laughs in 5 nanometer
Huh, this was super helpful. I really like this format/topic type.
The single most limiting factor is the transit time, which make clock frequency lower for a bigger die.
Some of you can recall the Pentium II cartridge processor, with the core running at 400 MHz. It had the cache memory installed on the same cartridge, but not onboard the chip, running at 200 MHz.
Smaller the transistors size, smaller che chip, higher the clock frequency.
Now Apple started a trend, with a relatively low computing power CPU, the M1, but with the instruction set highly optimised toward the applications, and the results are excellent. But only with their applications built with their compiler with their programming structure. The x86 can run any software written in any language with a variety of compilers.
Well that didnt age well....
could add "why not smaller than" and pc cpus VS mobile cpus
How about hexagon CPU?
Actually helpful information here, not that it isn't always, this one just hit close to home.
I don't know, those wafer scale chips that Cerebras made for AI deep learning were pretty awesome. I would love an APU of that size for my PC.
Yo this dude looks so much like LinusTechTips, he sounds like him too.
Damn, he does
He also spunds like thw guy on ChannelSuperFun
It's a saloon pack.
Hey, how do you wanna your hairs cut today?
- Mmmmm, I think I wanna linus tech tips style
why don’t the make CPUs smaller
Then they would need to make mother boards with bigger cpu slots
Wow it really hit me how far Linus has come....the way the videos are structured has always advanced. Thanks Linus and staff for the great videos....
They do. A Xeon or Threadripper is more than twice the size of a normal CPU. Freaking massive-though would make a rather poor grill cheese.