TechSpot: Fun Facts About Intel's Sandy Bridge Processors

Around this time last year TechSpot ran a story with some fun facts about Intel's then debutant 32nm manufacturing technology. For example, we learned that a 32nm transistor can switch on and off over 300 billion times in one second, conversely it would take a human 4000 years to flick a light switch on and off that many times.

For the launch of their 2nd-gen Core CPUs (a.k.a. Sandy Bridge), Intel have compiled another interesting list of fun facts. TechSpot has selected the most amusing and are republishing them with Intel's permission.

  • There are close to 1 billion transistors inside a 2nd Generation Intel Core processor. If a car were to have 1 billion parts - compared to the 30.000 they currently have - it would take the most productive car manufacturer 114 years to assemble this car.
     
  • If you equate the power consumption of a laptop based on the 2nd Generation Intel Core processors to an electric clothes dryer, drying one load for 60 minutes is equivalent to running a laptop for 147 hours or 6 days and 2.4 hours. If you compare the processor to an electric oven. baking a pizza for 45 minutes at 350 degrees (Fahrenheit) is equivalent to running 67 laptops for 50 hours.

Read: Fun Facts: Intel's Sandy Bridge Processors

These articles are brought to you in partnership with TechSpot.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Video Games Live concert review

Next Story

Rumour: Windows 7 Service Pack 1 to be released to OEMs tomorrow [Update]

27 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Any company that supports the huge amount of E waste should get the thumbs down.
The fun fact is Intel may bring out another pin socket in the future (1156) to create more problems,

Now thats a fun fact.

Another fun fact, they are apparently 'dropping like flies' when overclocked if I am to believe the people at certain overclocking forums. oh well...

jporter said,
Another fun fact, they are apparently 'dropping like flies' when overclocked if I am to believe the people at certain overclocking forums. oh well...

Link please? I am waiting for my RAM to arrive before assembling my Sandy Bridge computer which I plan to overclock.

'So if you compare this processor which is designed to be energy efficient to some of the most inefficient devices in the home...'

JamesWeb said,
'So if you compare this processor which is designed to be energy efficient to some of the most inefficient devices in the home...'

You get great marketing material

JamesWeb said,
'So if you compare this processor which is designed to be energy efficient to some of the most inefficient devices in the home...'

Sorry to be a smart arse but just because an electric oven requires a lot of power to heat up, this doesn't mean it's not efficient. In fact it's actually nearly 100% efficient because practically all of the electical energy used is converted to heat (which is the intended purpose of the device). Despite the recent improvements CPUs are still pretty inefficient because the majority of the energy used is wasted as heat.

smithy_dll said,
How long did you wait for the oven to heat up though?
It's an electric oven so heats up quickly. My toaster oven heats to 400 in about 2 minutes. Gas ovens take a bit more cause a lot of heat is released to the atmosphere due to the need of oxygen for the fire.
But really, 350F for 45 minutes? Talk about burned. I worked in a pizzaria during high school and our ovens were heated to 550- only took about 8-10 minutes to cook a pizza with the works.

Indeed...well done on improving the eco-friendliness of CPUs Intel. Now how much are you going to charge, what with China hiking the price of semi-precious elements used to create such processors up to breaking point.

Intel? create some comparisons? I think its good that we as a whole are actively reducing power consumption. I'm sure other CPU makers have similar comparisons

Shaun. said,
Intel? create some comparisons? I think its good that we as a whole are actively reducing power consumption. I'm sure other CPU makers have similar comparisons

P*ss on their chips, why not.

Raa said,
Source?
aside from the fact that the architecture for Core 2 was "Nehalem" - clearly Hebrew, i remember reading that 2 Israeli engineers designed it. not sure about Sandy Bridge tho.

Leeoniya said,
aside from the fact that the architecture for Core 2 was "Nehalem" - clearly Hebrew, i remember reading that 2 Israeli engineers designed it. not sure about Sandy Bridge tho.

Nehalem was developed in Oregon, US and was named after a town in Oregon, US.

Leeoniya said,
aside from the fact that the architecture for Core 2 was "Nehalem" - clearly Hebrew, i remember reading that 2 Israeli engineers designed it. not sure about Sandy Bridge tho.

Yonah was developed in Israel but not by 2 engineers... it was designed by multiple engineer teams supported by a bunch of supercomputers... 2 engineers today can design a coffee machine and nothing more, the world is much more complex today, contemporary products are beyond comprehension for 2 engineers and even for small teams.

Sandy Bridge was also developed in Israel (Intel's Haifa Design Center) by even more engineers and supercomputer support than Yonah. Anyway the design is never from scratch (such thing don't exist) it is always an upgrade of previous designs and that was a work of many teams from many design centers around the world. Let just say that Sandy Bridge was designed by Intel with a lot of informal help from outside starting from Pythagoras and up to the last useful scientific and engineering breakthrough you can imagine... in one word Sandy Bridge is a global product under Intel's guidance and financing (risk taking).