Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Intel plans 3GHz mobile force
By John G. Spooner
Special to ZDNet News
January 28, 2003, 7:20 AM PT
Intel plans to release faster and cheaper notebook-oriented Pentium 4 chips this year, even as manufacturers continue using less-expensive desktop Pentiums in notebooks to cut costs and attract buyers in the cutthroat consumer market.
Sources indicate that the new mobile Pentium 4 processors will run at speeds of up to 3.06GHz, coming closer than previous notebook offerings to matching the speed of desktop Pentium 4 chips.
At the same time, they'll cost far less than current notebook chips--including the existing Pentium 4-M mobile chip, which costs more than similar chips in the desktop line. Intel's top-of-the-line 2.4GHz Pentium 4-M sells for $562, much higher than the desktop Pentium 4 price of $193.
But the new mobile Pentium 4 chips are expected to sell for only a slight premium, as little as $15 more than the price of a corresponding desktop chip, according to sources.
The development should please major PC makers such as Toshiba and Hewlett-Packard, which began offering hybrid "desknote" Pentium 4 notebooks about a year ago. Although the machines are heavier and more power-hungry than standard laptops, the desknotes' lower prices and near-desktop performance have won over slew of buyers looking to replace their PCs with portable machines they could easily stow away.
Caught somewhat flat-footed by the popularity of Pentium 4 desknotes, Intel executives initially believed the trend would quickly pass. But the Pentium 4 desknote persisted throughout 2002 as more manufacturers launched new models in the category. HP, for one, has said it intends to carry on its desknote lines as long as it can continue to fit desktop chips into a reasonably sized machine.
The upcoming line of hybrid Pentium 4s will kill two birds with one stone. Because it's expected at speeds of up to 3.06GHz initially but with a lower price than an existing mobile Pentium 4-M, the new chip line will allow Intel to address the desknote market, but it won't put price pressure on the company's flagship processor line.
That's because the chipmaker will debut a new mobile processor, the Pentium-M, under the Centrino brand in March. Pentium-M will give Intel the room it needs to realign the mobile Pentium 4 line.
"Part of this is Intel coming to grips and recognizing that this phenomenon isn't going away," said Dean McCarron, an analyst with Mercury Research. "And, as the saying goes, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
Chip after chip
Don MacDonald, director of mobile platforms at Intel, acknowledged that Intel will change its mobile Pentium 4 lineup, but wouldn't go into details about pricing or clock speeds for the new chips
Meanwhile, MacDonald said, Intel's Centrino family--which includes a forthcoming Pentium-M chip (formerly known Banias) along with a new chipset and a wireless radio module for 802.11b--will become the company's new flagship mobile-processor line for tackling the higher end of the market made hot by the growth of wireless.
Intel will also continue selling the current version of its Pentium 4-M chip, and will quite likely add new speed grades, but its focus will be on delivering the faster chips, as an extension of the current mobile Pentium 4 line, MacDonald said.
MacDonald indicated that although the new mobile Pentium 4 chips will offer desktoplike speeds, they won't offer the same features as their desktop counterparts.
Much like Intel's Pentium 4C--a short-lived, special-order processor used by HP--the new mobile Pentium 4 chips are expected to essentially offer a desktop processor in a mobile package. As a result, the chips are not expected to offer hyperthreading or Intel's faster 800MHz bus, used by the desktop chips.
The new mobile Pentium 4 chips will likely lack some of the power management features of Intel's more standard notebook chips as well. They're not likely to offer Intel's SpeedStep, for instance, which lowers a notebook chip's clock speed to extend the amount of time the machine can run on battery power.
But the new chips, expected midyear, will run at a much higher range of clock speeds--between 2.4GHz and 3.06GHz--and include a 533MHz bus, sources familiar with Intel's plans indicated. The speeds will put the chips only a few clicks behind Intel's desktop Pentium 4, which will be available at 3.2GHz or faster by the time of the new mobile chip's release.
Although Intel's new mobile Pentium 4 may grant consumers only slightly more megahertz, analysts say it could do a lot for manufacturers looking to cut prices and compete in the consumer notebook market.
The wireless factor
Expensive notebooks won't fade away. But the desknote trend could begin to dwindle with the popularity of wireless computing, which requires a notebook with a fairly long battery life, something the desknotes don't have. Some Centrino laptops, meanwhile, will be able to run up to 6 hours on a single charge, according to Intel estimates.
Mercury Research's McCarron said that Intel's combination of a new mobile Pentium 4 and the higher-end Centrino line covers both those bases.
"The advantage to the manufacturer involves a couple of things," McCarron said. "If he already has a Pentium 4-M system, he can take advantage of the cost savings of going to a desktop processor without doing a new motherboard. The reverse is, if he designs a system around the (mobile Pentium 4), he has the option of putting notebook processors in it. The manufacturer has the flexibility of going in the direction the market may dictate...as opposed to being locked in.
"Part of what Centrino is about is pointing out the sexier aspects of mobile computing," said McCarron. "Those aspects--things like hanging out in Starbucks doing 802.11 Web browsing--are not well supported by these desktop processor systems."
Centrino will appear in most Intel-based notebooks built for businesses and in the remainder of notebooks weighing less than about 7 pounds that are aimed at consumers or small businesses. Where consumers trend toward larger, less-expensive machines, businesses continue to buy lighter notebooks and often equip them with wireless.
"For people who have a need for mobility, we've got Centrino mobile technology," said Intel's MacDonald.
Over time, MacDonald said, "what generally happens--and it depends to some extent on your behavior--is that people begin to get untethered to use wireless and take (the notebook) with them. Then the rules change. But we're not trying to ram that down people's throats."
wbmw -
That would be nice!
John -
Something confusing in the article -
CHIPZILLA HAS SPED up its introduction of server microprocessors and will release a 3GHz Xeon with a 400MHz bus this quarter.
The 3.06GHz 533 Xeon will cost $722 when it is introduced on the 23rd of February
Wish he'd make up his mind.
EP
John -
Congrats to the Bucs. They gave dem Raiders an old fashoned butt whoopin.
EP
Greg -
(Seems a much more fruitful discussion thread than why executive X sold options, IMHO) <VBG>
What??? You don't like spirited debate with deep insights on meaningful matters?
EP
Spokesshave -
Then, when I posted the correct link to the correct information
You did no such thing. There was no link.
Perhaps you're having another Senior momment?
EP
Spokesshave -
Your source is CBS Marketwatch, which obviously misquoted the story from the Dow Jones Business Wire, which is my source.
Perhaps they did misquote the story. Here's what I said: "It may turn out that he acquired those extra 90K shares by some other means". I clearly allowed for another explanation. I didn't claim it as fact. If you had another source that clarifies the matter why didn't you post it instead of arguing incessantly? ? If the article is wrong then you can clear it up. That would settle the matter and there would be nothing to argue about.
EP
Spokesshave -
Are you losing it? Who cares how many shares David Yoffie bought? We're not talking about him. We're talking about Craig Barrett.
Read this again:
Intel Chief Executive Craig Barrett bought 602,000 shares of the company's common stock last Thursday, according to regulatory documents.
Barrett acquired 512,000 shares by exercising stock options, at $2.81 a share, according to a Form 4 released Monday by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
If he bought 602,000 and 512,000 came from options then that leaves 90,000 shares bought that didn't come from options.
602,000-512,000 = 90,000.
This is getting too stupid to continue and frankly I don't think you are this stupid yourself but you are doing a pretty good job of changing my mind.
EP
Spokesshave -
Wrong. The other 90K shares were bought by David Yoffie.
There you go again making a fool out of yourself.
http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/iwon-com/news-story.asp?guid={55E8227D-3AFC-4322-818A-B830F0C29...
Intel Chief Executive Craig Barrett bought 602,000 shares of the company's common stock last Thursday, according to regulatory documents.
Who bought the shares?? Craig Barrett.
How many did he buy?? 602,000.
Barrett acquired 512,000 shares by exercising stock options, at $2.81 a share, according to a Form 4 released Monday by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Who exercised these options?? Craig Barrett.
How many options were exercised?? 512,000.
What is the difference between 602,000 and 512,000?
Answer: 90,000 shares.
Please get a grip Spokesshave. I'm getting embarrassed on your behalf.
EP
Dew -
I want to say how nice it is to see someone who can take the contrarian position without feeling threatened. Nice to have you here.
Now to address your points. I disagree with your post. First off, when Intel releases a product there is a high level of confidence among their customers that the product will actually be available in volume. Yes if you go back a couple of years you can find an exception or two but that is past history and Intel's track record has returned to it's historic standards. AMD has garnered no such confidence with their customers, now or historically. A product release from AMD now is seen as Marketing bluster and little more. Furthermore any further slips by AMD do in fact raise the question of AMD's overall viability while no such conclusion can be claimed about Intel.
EP
Semi -
[To Spokesshave]Don't expect to be treated as neutral, when you don't act that way. If you want to take a contrary point of view, that's fine, but If you want to dish it out, then you better be prepared to take it.
Thank you for putting it better than I could.
I like having Spokesshave post here. He's a pretty good guy and we need a contrary view. The problem is he wants to bash away without restraint and then cries foul when he gets a little in return. I hope he keeps posting here because I like him but I also hope he gets over his crybaby attitude.
EP
Spokesshave -
I think it would only be fair of you to mention that Barrett apparently bought 90,000 shares on the open market. It may turn out that he acquired those extra 90K shares by some other means but that not withstanding you should mention that this is a very bullish sign.
WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- Intel Chief Executive Craig Barrett bought 602,000 shares of the company's common stock last Thursday, according to regulatory documents.
Barrett acquired 512,000 shares by exercising stock options, at $2.81 a share, according to a Form 4 released Monday by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
EP
subzero -
Otellini and Barrett are simply exercising 10 year old options (from grant date) that would have otherwise expired this month.
I wasn't really serious. I was just pokin fun at a poster who loves to jump to conclusions. You might note though that Barrett bought 602K but only exercised 512K in options. Why if that doesn't prove something I don't know what does! [G]
EP
Spokeshave -
Intel's Barrett acquires 602,000 shares
By Leticia Williams, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 2:24 PM ET Jan 27, 2003
WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- Intel Chief Executive Craig Barrett bought 602,000 shares of the company's common stock last Thursday, according to regulatory documents.
Barrett acquired 512,000 shares by exercising stock options, at $2.81 a share, according to a Form 4 released Monday by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Barrett reported in the filing that he directly owns 3.2 million shares of the Santa Clara, Calif.-based chipmaker (INTC: news, board). He indirectly owns about 3,000 shares.
Shares of the company's common stock gained 1 cent to trade at $15.86 recently.
Well I guess this proves Intel is headed for the moon!
Spokeshave -
However, if it does turn out that 256K cache Hammers perform about 20% or so better than like-clocked Athlons, then it could be bad news for Intel.
Not at a 2200+ rating and not unless they can manufacture lots and lots of them.
EP
Spokeshave -
The Opteron beats the P4 2.2 in a few tests, is close in others, and gets beat in others still. It is certainly competitive with the P4 2.2.
Good analysis but Intel never promised that the 2.2GHz P4 would be the fastest processor on the planet...
EP
Spokeshave -
I don't bash Intel. In fact, I rarely mention them. When I do, I try to be truthful, if biased. Can you say the same about AMD?
I am truthful but I don't need to be fair. Everyone knows I'm biased and I don't pretend otherwise.
If you'd take that chip off your shoulder you could make a good contribution here. You're smart and highly educated. Remember that you are dealing with other people like you and they won't let you get away with BS here like you might on some other boards. You could make a good contribution when you don't let your animosity get the best of you. Why are you so resentful anyway?
EP
Spokeshave -
That is why I said it is better to wait for a well designed test from a well respected source.
You were more than happy to accept the scores when you thought a 2500+ Barfon beat a higher speed P4. Now that you've been proven wrong you want to be Mr Reasonable. Why didn't you just read the article in the first place? You could have been reasonable then.
EP
Spokeshave -
The problem is that you don't even bother to read thoroughly before you pull the trigger. You're just dying to bash Intel and it gets the best of you. You get trigger happy. Don't blame me when you make yourself look foolish. I didn't do it, you did. You should know better.
Though several people in the past have proven you wrong on several issues. I cannot recall you ever admitting it.
Care to explain?
Alan -
Both were overclocked to 2.4Ghz and 400Mhz FSB.
You could figure that out, I could figure that out. Too bad out resident driveby basher couldn't figure that out.
EP
Spokeshave -
I admit that my Taiwanese is a but rusty.
I don't read Taiwanese either. In fact I didn't even let my browser download the language fonts. What I DID do was read the english in the SS benchmark windows. They showed a 2.4GHz clock rate and a 2x200 memory rate. In your unbridled zest to bash you are just making yourself look foolish. Why be so careless as you have been over the last few days? You're not an idiot so don't make yourself look like one. Take the time next time and do your due diligence.
EP
spokeshave -
I guess I am missing something then. In that link, the 2500+ Barton smokes the 2.66 P4 in nearly every test. How is that possibly interpreted as being disappointing. Oh, wait. You guys are intelevangelists. I understand your disappointment now.
I read that link and it looks like a 3000+ to me, not a 2500+. The benchmarks look to me to be overclocked because they say the MHz is 2.41GHz and the model number is 3018 (est), plus the bus is 2x200, not the 2x166 for Barton 2500+.
I think this is another instance of you shooting off your mouth without even bothering to read what's right in front of your nose.
EP
Spokeshave -
We all wait for a more reputable review. And we wait and we wait and we .....
EP
Semi -
Can you give that link again. It doesn't work right.
EP
119 -
You got jokes from lots of us about "silicone". That's because we've all made similar mistakes and the best thing for you was to joke about it too. I've said must stupider things than that myself.
EP
John -
(I know, I know, consider the source)
You answered your own question.
EP
wbmw -
I read several articles from the show and Hector is definately becoming a Jerry clone, at least as far as bluster and cheap shots go. But what the heck, in the end you have to have a product to sell and customers know that. AMD had to present something at the show and BS was more readily available than Hammer. This is beginning to be like turning on the news and hearing that Bush is running out of patience. How many times can they keep recycling the same old line with no action?
EP
wbmw -
looks like Hammer didn't win best of show at LinuxWorld.
Well I'm shocked! I was sure Hammer was going to steal the show!
EP
Alan -
Thanks for the explanation. I will pass it on to my friends...
EP
Greg -
Oh, yes, the company does report this. They turn over this info. to the IRS (take my word for this, it is true).
I must remain skeptical. I am told Intel asks their employees how they have dispositioned their shares because if they haven't retain them Intel must report the status to the IRS.
As a side note, my year end statement from Schwab includes a footnote saying that options activity is not reported to the IRS. I don't know if this is related, just thought I'd throw that in.
EP
Dew -
For fraud, the limit generally extends to six years. (One of my regular backgammon partners was an IRS auditor.) Dew
Maybe but if the person still holds the shares they would be entitled to a AMT refund or tax credit anyway so it would be very hard to prove fraud.
EP
Alan -
Good summary. A couple of other points, if I understand it correctly the AMT tax credit is refunded after 1 year if you still hold the shares or at least it is a tax credit. Also, many of the people I know exercised their ISO options, held the shares yet never reported the transaction to the IRS. The exercise of ISOs is not reported by the company either. When I questioned the legality of this I was told that there is a 3 year statute of limitations on the IRS collecting back taxes. The owner will of course pay capital gains once they eventually sell. Of course I never engaged in this.
EP
wbmw -
Does anyone have any speculation as to the pros and cons of a coalition developing process tech as opposed to a single company with the means to do it?
Don't you think Intel is kind of like a coalition? With Processor, Flash and DPS/comms featuring in their products (and sometimes all 3) they have several different divisions participating in process development, all with their own specific needs, plus their volumes and revenue are certainly equivilant to a coalition of smaller companies.
EP
Spokeshave -
Your personal vendetta against me is clouding your judgement.
You're joking right?
Do a little research, look it up. Maybe a web search on "frequency divider" or some such. I am sure that your search will return several sites that describe devices called "frequency dividers" that take small numbers of Hz turn them into large numbers of Hz.
You make a silly statement then you want me to research it for you? Go research it yourself. I don't think you're going to find anything that multiplies a clock frequency and is called a divider.
As for Otellini's shares, I specifically excluded options from my statement about his holdings. Certainly, in comparison to the number of shares that he just sold, and the number of options he holds, the number of free-trading shares he holds is quite small.
Your statement WAS about options. He exercised them and sold most but not all of them. His holdings are now larger than before exercise by 100K shares. You could have saved yourself some egg on your face by simply reading yesterday's news items for Intel. That's why your driveby bashing sounds so juvenile.
EP
Spokeshave -
He sold every last share. With the exception of remaining options, that leaves Otellini with practically no position in Intel - only a few thousand shares. What kind of message does that send to shareholders?
The only message I see here is that tonight just isn't your night. You are wrong again. Mr Ottelini still holds hundreds of thousands of shares of Intel stock and millions of unexercised options.
http://biz.yahoo.com/t/53/3489.html
This link says he held 388,413 shares as of 12-27-03.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ft/030121/1042491012110_1.html
Mr Otellini exercised options on 1m shares at $3.41 each. He sold 900,000 shares in two lots on January 16 and 17, for about $15.2m, netting a profit of about $11.8m.
He retains ownership of 393,000 shares and options on 3.5m shares.
Despite your claim, this link says he exercised 1 million options and sold 900K. It is clear that you are much more interested in bashing than doing a little simple reading.
Why not call it a night, get some sleep and perhaps tomorrow will be a better day for you.
EP
Spokeshave -
Technically speaking, since frequency is expressed in inverse units, to go to larger (in magnitude) number, you must divide the frequency. I had actually written "multiplies" at first, realized my mistake and corrected the post.
Ahhhh.. no.
For a given time interval you have x number of clock edges going in to the PLL and a number greater than x of clock edges coming out. That's not division. There are circuits that act as clock dividers and they output a number of clock edges that is less than the number going in for a given time interval.
It is a matter of semantics anyway. sometimes the "correct" way of saying something is the most confusing.
Maybe sometimes but in this case you were simply, shall we say, mistaken.
EP
USUCK -
(don't try to chalk this up to random, tax, or diversification reasons. It's very clear he's selling most of the farm)
Another goose egg for you. He exercised some options that were about to expire. Use em or lose em.
EP
Dew -
As Spokeshave said, the pll acts as a clock multiplier so that's where the clock comes from. The internal speed paths limit the frequency so that's where the limit comes from. Why does one device run faster than another? The extra stages in the pipeline have less logic between storage elements so there is less delay between stages and they can run faster.
EP
Bad link.
Spokeshave -
Not meaning to be pedantic but you mean multiplies not divides.
EP