Friday, April 20th 2007

NVIDIA plans 45 nm chip in 2008

NVIDIA is working on its 45 nanometre part. This year, the company plans to migrate to 65 nanometre as much as possible, but by the end of 2008 it should have 45 nanometre parts ready.

The company first has to shrink its 65 nanometre chips to 55 nanometre as this is the optical shrink and later it will go for 45 nanometre. Intel announced it will go 45 nanometre in late Q4 07 / early Q1 2008, AMD said that for its CPUs it will be able to do it by the mid of 2008.

The good thing about 45 nanometre chips is that on 15x15 square millimetres die you can put 1,350 millions of transistors or roughly twice as much as you can do with 65 nanometre.

After that the next big step is 32 nanometre scheduled for 2010.Source: Fudzilla
Add your own comment

12 Comments on NVIDIA plans 45 nm chip in 2008

#1
D007
now this sounds like an excellent step in the right direction. im looking forward to this one..
Posted on Reply
#2
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
With them going to 65nm...how come their GPUS are still power hungry and heatwaves?
Posted on Reply
#3
ghost101
by: WarEagleAU
With them going to 65nm...how come their GPUS are still power hungry and heatwaves?
Because if you increase clock speed by 50% the watt increase is 125%. So unless die shrinks or the use of more efficient architecture can keep up with that, power consumption will go up.
Posted on Reply
#4
Alcpone
by: ghost101
Because if you increase clock speed by 50% the watt increase is 125%. So unless die shrinks or the use of more efficient architecture can keep up with that, power consumption will go up.
And we can all continue god's work and burn those hydro-carbons :D
Posted on Reply
#5
EastCoasthandle
by: WarEagleAU
With them going to 65nm...how come their GPUS are still power hungry and heatwaves?
Because AMD doesn't make GPUs, ATI makes GPUs.
Posted on Reply
#6
D007
lol... i never had to raise 125% power on my overclocking lol.. I must not be understanding this.. i dont doubt it.. I just don't know much about it in general.. anyone care to explain.. im looking at it like as if the processor is a 1.2 v processor and you overvolt it to 1.58.. about 40%ish..power increase and my oc is from 2.1 to 3.3 so thats over 50% with much less than 100% power gain.. I'm probiblly misunderstanding this..lol.. please feel free to explain if you don't mind. I'd honestly like to understand it..
Posted on Reply
#7
Alcpone
by: EastCoasthandle
Because AMD doesn't make GPUs, ATI makes GPUs.
I thought we were talking about nVidia here :confused:
Posted on Reply
#8
Alcpone
by: D007
lol... i never had to raise 125% power on my overclocking lol.. I must not be understanding this.. i dont doubt it.. I just don't know much about it in general.. anyone care to explain.. im looking at it like as if the processor is a 1.2 v processor and you overvolt it to 1.58.. about 40%ish..power increase and my oc is from 2.1 to 3.3 so thats over 50% with much less than 100% power gain.. I'm probiblly misunderstanding this..lol.. please feel free to explain if you don't mind. I'd honestly like to understand it..
Im sure you could shave some volts off your cpu, that is too high for my like...
Posted on Reply
#9
bigboi86
by: EastCoasthandle
Because AMD doesn't make GPUs, ATI makes GPUs.
Noone said anything about AMD or ATI lol..
Posted on Reply
#10
D007
by: Alcpone
Im sure you could shave some volts off your cpu, that is too high for my like...
lol.. i doubt it.. just my luck of the core this time around is all most likely.. i tried and i got it down some but if i go lower i will run into stability issues.. but it's so friggin weird.. it's like lately things are just getting better for it all of a sudden.. like one day i was just totally stuk at 3.2 ghz lol.. then all of a sudden i could go to 3.4 and it made the voltages more stable for me at lower clocks.. all these dam driver and bios revisions keep changing everything.. so who knows.. maybe i can down it a bit now again.. seriously i doubt it though lol..i wont go any higher on voltage.. i was at 1.67 volts so 1.58 is like a cake walk to me now..lol.. honestly though, it's to high for my liking too.. but the cooler i got handles it like a champ so im ok with it for now..
Posted on Reply
#11
ghost101
by: D007
lol... i never had to raise 125% power on my overclocking lol.. I must not be understanding this.. i dont doubt it.. I just don't know much about it in general.. anyone care to explain.. im looking at it like as if the processor is a 1.2 v processor and you overvolt it to 1.58.. about 40%ish..power increase and my oc is from 2.1 to 3.3 so thats over 50% with much less than 100% power gain.. I'm probiblly misunderstanding this..lol.. please feel free to explain if you don't mind. I'd honestly like to understand it..
Yeh sorry, its the voltage which increases it by so much. So if you increase the volatge from 1.2 to 1.58, power usage will increase by (1.58/1.2)^2 = 1.73 , so 73%. However, increasing the clock speed also has an exponential relationship becasue voltage is important when increasing clock speeds. Otherwise, with no voltage increase, itd be 1:1.

Im not an expert on this or anything, so i hope someone can correct or confirm this.
Posted on Reply
#12
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
I think what he said, or meant to say, is that, if the cpu people were actually making graphics cards, the heat and power reqs would go down, just like they have on the die shrinks for their respective cpus. I would still think, with die shrinks, power and heat would go down. Im not seeing it really. Unless they are adding more, which they are with transistors and stuff.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment