It seems the 4GHz chip, whilst achievable, can't be reliably mass-produced, and AMD agrees:

http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/3422071

The near future of microprocessor development looks like it's going to go sideways. That article mentions chips for home entertainment, with larger L2 caches, and the like with an emphasis on "dual-core" processors.

Would someone mind explaining what "dual core" CPUs are all about?

Quiz Options:
Moore's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moores_Law) states that processing power, often expressed either as calculation speed or number of transistors, doubles every 18-24 months. Its death has been predicted many times, but this is the first time microprocessor manufacturers have deviated from the "faster is better" mantra.

:idea: The first option is for those who think that despite this, circuit design and code will compensate and Moore's Law will continue.
:idea: The second option is for those who think that the law needs to be stretched, perhaps to 24-30 months.
:idea: Others might think this is just a delay, processor speeds will start increasing regularly again when the next-generation chip fabrication facilities are constructed.
:idea: The fourth option is for those who think it's time to put the concept to rest, or otherwise disbelieve.
:idea: Finally, the Wikipedia page puts forth the idea that Moore's law is a prime example of a meme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme).

Dual core CPUs are just that dual core. They infact have two CPU cores on the same silicon die. The advantage is more processing power in a package that's not much larger.

With double the heat output, presumably. Any other downsides?

I don't believe heat output is doubled, as they do make a die shrink. E.g. smaller nanometer process.

Sun showed off an 8 core CPU. IIRC, the chip isn't that big at all, well not much bigger than most CPUs these days. The heatsink on that chip was no larger than the one on the Pentium Pros I have.

Intels current Northbridge is ill equiped for memory throughput. AMD has it right in the Opteron where each chip basically gets its own memory but can share its memory with the other processors thus removing the northbridge bottleneck of 1 pipe for both processors.

I think the law is still valid - it's simply an economic decision: not enough competition / it does make more sense for chipbuilders to stick with existing procedures as long as possible and to max out existing investments.

I personally think that i can be done. Moore's Law is just a concept not a proven fact. Anything could be done just may take some time and money but it can and more and likely will be done. With the rate of the processor manufacturing and speed increases the 4GHz should be here with in no time.

Thanks
- James

Dual cores will double the CPU power in essence, they're already doing it, simply in a alternate method. Look at this issue as more then just cycles, look at the total output, theres more then one factor to this equation, and what matterns in the end (and what Moore's law is essentially specifying) is that you will get twice the functional power out of a system in the end, one method or another.

Moore's Law is not about doubling mhz. It's about doubling the transistor count on the silicon. Dual core fits in nicely.

Good point, but I don't think anyone said (or even thought) it was about doubling cycles/second.

Welcome to WHT!

Well this issue seems to be the problem with "uprofitable". Don't forget that long ago computers could only be in houses of milinares+.Therefore this is jsut a amtter of time until they find a way to make it profitable. NASA uses gold wiring inside their spacecraft while we use copper, why cause it more efficeint, but to have your wires made golden is a financual burden.

There you have it its jsut a matter of time...we will all run 100 billion exo hrtz processors one day >.>