Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : CYRIX / NSM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scumbria who wrote (22056)	12/15/1997 1:25:00 PM
From: FJB	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 33344

This will be my last attempt to try and get my point across. The generalization you are making about die size and clock speed does not hold true. Since you are having problems accepting the fact the largest x86 chip in terms of die size is running faster than all the smaller chips(not because it is larger), I'll use your own numbers also: C6 PMMX K6 M2 PII -- ---- -- -- --- die size 88mm2 128 162 197 203 top shipping speed 200MHz 233 233 188 300 You say: There are numerous physical effects which tend to cause larger die to run at lower frequencies. AND 1. Increasing the die size of the CPU impacts clock speed. Floor planning and routing become less efficient. Clock skews increase. The pad ring requires longer routes. All global wiring potentially requires longer routes. Power consumption is increased. All of these factors cause the CPU to run at a lower clock speed. The evidence does not support your generalization that a large die size causes a chip to run slower. I'll leave it up to you to determine what the causes for this discrepancy are. I'd start with the process technologies being used to manufacture the respective chips. Bob