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.
Did Intel just slip 1066/2MB Prescott into 2005?
While informing customers of the P4 product delay, Intel also firmed its plans to introduce dual-core processors next year, said Anderson. Intel also plans on introducing larger memory caches and system buses next year.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/yhoo/story.asp?source=blq/yhoo&siteid=yhoo&dist=yhoo&gui...
upc
and since it is CRIME to mislead
If so, Intel management would be in jail for misleading about No AMD64, Prescott 4GHz in 2004, and everything else.
upc
BTW, Blaming the PCI-Express spec? Priceless.
But wages/job quality NO DIFFERENT this cycle compared to previous cycles, per Fed Res. study:
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=5818727
The rumor from c't said it sucks. For your data point to mean anything, you need to know how much the Opteron would improve on gpg going from 32b to 64b. Do you?
upc
The issue is that iAMD64 is rumored to "suck" performance-wise on Nocona. So it may exacerbate the problem considerably.
upc
Yes, I recall seeing 3.8 GHz in Q4, too, and yes, it seems that will be the next "short supply" paper product they'll manage.
upc
Would it be correct to assume that AMD will be able to outperform the best single-core Prescott ever produced on 90nm with their best 130nm SOI single-core A64-FX? I'm thinking of the FX-55 here. Because it sure looks like Intel is running out of gas on single-core Prescott at 4 Ghz or at best 4.2 GHz.
upc
Forget about 3.8 GHz... they can't make many 3.6 GHz:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=3687590
Dell has withdrawn 3.6 GHz P4's on some offerings.
upc
Intel short on 3.6GHz chips
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=20360476
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5289467.html
upc
"There are no manufacturing issues, it is just that we cannot, errmmm, manufacture any 4GHz P4 this year. But we have retaken the airport! We have driven the infidel into the desert!"
For some funny Intel spin on the delay, see this:
http://www.aceshardware.com/forum?read=115092313
upc
Thanks for that info. I have to say, given the very public promises about this from Intel execs, you would think they would've done anything possible to get some 4GHz parts out in Q4, even a handful for reviewers, i.e. a paper launch.
Am I correct in assuming that this suggests that 3.8 GHz yields are likely to be very low until 05, as well? (otherwise, the distribution would suggest some 4GHz parts could be realized, right?)
upc
Does this suggest they have no idea if they can make one at all? What would provide confidence of hitting 4 GHz in Q1 05, while knowing they cannot make it in Q404? In other words, is this expressing hope that a new not-yet-evaluated stepping will solve the problem?
upc
Well, Intel just slipped again. No 4GHz part this year.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=20360296
upc
Both HardOCP system recommendations are AMD-based, and it says NewEgg will be selling the parts used to build these systems in special bundles on its site. That should be good for AMD high-end sales this quarter.
upc
Are you being misleading on purpose? I cannot imagine why you continue to compare AthlonXP/64 ratings to Sempron ratings, and act suprised that they are not consistent. Are you surprised by the performance of a Celeron 2.6 GHz vs a Prescott 2.6 GHz part? What does this sort of post add to this forum?
upc
Yeah, that's it.
Your example dialogue is laughably unrealistic. Your "single number" reasoning ignores the two different brands, and the history of Intel doing the exact same thing.
I don't particularly want to debate this point with you any further right now. I think if you give yourself a little time, maybe a week, to think about it, you'll understand, and it will be less a matter of your "winning" an argument, and more about reality.
EDIT: I might add that HP, Lenovo, Acer, etc. obviously had a hand in this, and I trust their marketing intincts more than those of an engineer.
upc
The only difference is that Celeron D is now called a "335", rather than a "2.8GHz",
This is not true, practically speaking.
NewEgg: " Intel Celeron D 335 2.8 GHz, 533MHz FSB, 256K L2 Cache Processor - Retail"
HP: "Processor
Intel® Celeron D processors up to 335‡ (2.8GHz)"
So you see, OEMs and direct retailers prominently display the GHz, in addition to Intel's new (bewildering) model numbers.
Does that answer your question?
As I said before, I am not sure why AMD did not ALSO label their parts with the Intel model numbers. I suspect there may be a legal issue or risk. What do you think?
upc
Yes, but server demand, and high-end desktop demand are somewhat limited. Mid-end desktop demand is big enough for AMD to sell lots of 90nm A64s. With their performance and feature advantages, AMD should prefer this market to the low-end value market.
Finally, you know, at some point, you have to assume that management did do some analysis of this stuff, and that's why the roadmap is the way it is. They have much more information than we do about costs, demand, etc.
If you don't trust them to do something so basic, it's probably not the right investment to be making.
upc
Intel #@$!'s up another chipset:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17489
Lindenhurst (Nocona Server chipset) has problems.
upc
Lindenhurst at risk of serious delay:
So much for Nocona servers...
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17489
Some sources are suggesting that fixes to these Lindenhurst problems - if they are problems - aren't likely to be ready until much later this year.
No wonder Craig was upset.
upc
If like-rated Semprons and A64s don't compare equivalently on the overlapping parts of the performance suite then AMD has a major PR disaster coming very soon!
Nonsense. Don't you get it? The "official" explanations for AMD PR rating systems have always been a joke. For some reason (I suspect it may be a legal issue/risk), they will not state what everyone with half a brain knows: AMD PR systems are designed to be compared with Intel "ratings", i.e. GHz.
To say it again:
Athlon64 PR is designed to be compared with Prescott GHz.
Sempron PR is designed to be compared with Celeron GHz.
The crap about a different "performance suite" is pure BS. It's really about a different brand for comparison. Prescott. Celeron. Prescott. Celeron. Athlon64. Sempron.
It's really very simple!
upc
Certain individuals are upset that Intel can no longer get away with the Celeron GHz scam.
upc
Well, then you are against it. It is exactly what AMD is doing. It is a fantastic marketing move against the Celeron, long overdue.
upc
are demand-limited as the market for $300+ cpus is not exactly gigantic
Yes, which is why they should aim 90nm at server, mobile, and finally, $100-$150 mid-end Athlon64, before they use it for $50-$100 desktop Sempron. Use the capacity to take more mid-end share, not low end.
Thankfully, they seem to understand this.
upc
Yes, of course Celeron D megahertz. I believe the Celeron clockspeed is still being marketed, despite the new Intel model system. I do agree it would be even better if they also copied the Intel model system, and indicated that as well. Maybe Intel would sue somehow? You know, something like this.
Sempron 2800+ (Cel-335)
upc
No, as it should not be. Is a 2.8 GHz Celeron faster than a 2.7 GHz Prescott? No it is not. Different brand, different rating system. This is nearly the whole point in launching the Sempron brand. To counter the high-clock low-performance Celeron D, AMD needs two rating systems, and to use two rating systems, they really needed two brands.
upc
There are two different rating scales. His point is not valid.
Sempron PR is not meant to be comparable to Athlon XP/64 PR.
Sempron PR is for Celeron D clock.
Athlon PR is for Prescott clock.
Just as you don't expect a Celeron D 2.8 GHz to perform as a Prescott 2.8 GHz, Sempron 3100+ will not perform as a theoretical Athlon64 3100+ would.
upc
EDIT: it is interesting that AMD never wants to say that their PR systems are meant to approximate Intel performance in various brands. There must be some legal risk in doing so.
Q: Do the model numbers of the AMD Sempron processors represent performance relative to the AMD Athlon processors?
A: No, the third-party benchmarks for the AMD Sempron processor include leading productivity applications and benchmark suites. These benchmarks reflect real-world application performance for popular, every-day software applications. These benchmarks are intended to help consumers and PC manufacturers make educated decisions. The AMD Sempron processor is designed for everyday computing and employs a benchmark suite focused on popular productivity applications. The AMD Athlon 64 processor, designed for demanding multimedia applications and a cinematic computing experience, employs a broader benchmark suite encompassing advanced digital content creation and demanding 3-D gaming applications. For more information on the performance of the AMD Sempron processor, visit www.amd.com.
Yes, all mobile Semprons and 3100+ have the NX bit.
upc
Enhanced Virus Protection capability
* Mobile AMD Sempron processors will help provide a more secure computing environment with AMD’s Enhanced Virus Protection (EVP) capability. Combined with Microsoft’s Data Execution Prevention in the upcoming Windows® XP Service Pack 2, AMD’s EVP is designed to prevent certain types of viruses from replicating and spreading to other systems. Enhanced Virus Protection will by default only protect the user's Windows operating system. Users must, at installation of Microsoft Windows® XP Service Pack 2 or when they first purchase their systems, enable the protection of their applications and associated files or they will not be protected from memory buffer overrun attacks. Advanced Micro Devices, inc. and Microsoft strongly recommend that users install and regularly update third party anti-virus software as part of their security strategy.
The anandtech review also confirms that the K7 Semprons are fairly rated versus their Celeron D competition. As for 90nm, why on earth would AMD target initial output to the value segment, when the ramp could be directed at everything else (with associated higher margins) first? Also, the roadmap indicates H105, not Q105.
upc
Roadmap updated (from silicon investor again).
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_608,00.html
upc
According to silicon investor, the mobile Semprons are all K8 derivatives, though 32-bit only, which should mean that they all support the NX protection of SP2.
mas should be pleased. :)
upc
No, the original Red Storm processor was:
Red Storm runs on 10,000 of the Model 246 processors.
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5097398.html
That would be a 2.0 GHz single-core.
EDIT: So they would be talking about 2 x 2.5 GHz, which would be impressive, especially if it remains within the TDP envelope.
upc
I think one major thing might be that all of the SP2 improvements will be folded into it. Beyond that I could imagine improvements to the driver situation and completion of the XP style gui which does not seem to be present in the current public beta. At that point I think it would be a matter of application testing and porting.
upc
and we have a new beta to look forward to, according to the Microsoft team, as noted here:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=16919
Brian Marr, Microsoft' Windows XP64 product manager, filed details of the move on a private Windows server 64 newsgroup.
Marr admits that the current beta build is "very old" but he said that Microsoft is trying to get an update out soon. He said: "I think you are going to be impressed by how much work our development team has put into the OS".
upc
This is old news, or at least, old rumor, dating from last month.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=20248703&s=maureen
upc
So this is true, then:
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=20350544
?
Google provides an interesting perspective on this guy:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22paul+engel%22+intel&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&am...
upc
The Sun Fire V40z is only available with an even number of processors (2 or 4).
http://www.sun.com/servers/entry/v40z/arch-wp.pdf
So I can only imagine you clicked on the W2100z or the V20z by accident, not the V40z.
upc
You may wish to consider P/S and PEG, as well as FY04 and FY05 P/E, although a brief scan of your posting history suggests you may not be interested.
upc