Replies to post #6822 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[SemiconEng]

deleted. Duplicate

[SemiconEng]

Intel's Prescott desktop and notebook power consumption revealed
Typical Inquirer fair, really odd thing being claim that intial prescott will not be 90 nm.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11224


So, if a person was to believe that "not be 90nm" rumor for a moment, actually, that would explain the unexpected reported initial 103 watts of Prescott. IF, the 90nm Process were healthy, but IF there were something wrong with the design of the 90nm P4 product, then intel MIGHT push the 130nm P4 version to a higher speed, with an expected higher power requirement, and initially introduce that as Prescott. It would also explain the inquirers report about Prescott reaching 3.8GHz by the relatively short timeframe of Q2 next year, with the product then actually being on 90nm.

The scenerio goes something like this.....

* Intel introduces 130nm P4, "Prescott" (cough) @ 3.4GHz with 103 watt output

* A short while goes by, say Q1/04, and "magically" the 3.4GHz Prescott power output is significantly reduced (by the REAL 90nm Prescott).

* The second stepping of 90nm Precott bumps the speed to 3.8GHz in Q2/04

All pure speculation, of course. But something wrong with the 90nm design, fits with intel's claim that the 90nm Process is "Healthy" as reported by Silicon Strategies, AND with the Inquirers rumours. Granted, the rumors are "Inquirer Rumors", AND so we all know what those are worth, eh?

Semi