Replies to post #62377 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[savantu]

And which of these demonstrate expertise in DSP functionality? It seems you have not answered the question.

Check my previous post.

Because of their Imageon product line? Please. Imageon is a minor player in the market, and far from the state-of-the-art. ATI is not at all a big name brand in cell phones, at least, nowhere near the kind of presence of a TI, a Samsung, or a Motorola.

The funny part is Motorola and Samsung use ATI products in their cellphones.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2003_Oct_21/ai_109051497



K8 performance/watt is no where near enough to make an Atom competitor. The lowest power K8 dual core ever produced was a 31W Turion processor at 2.0GHz. It's a far cry from Atom's 2W TDP and 100mW idle power measurements.

And the performance delta ?

How much does a 45nm Turion running at 0.8V and 700-800MHz would burn ? Not more than 3-5w.And we're talking about a full desktop x86 core.


If manufactured on a more modern 65nm or upcoming 45nm process, the 2-3 process generations of shrink could reduce power dissipation by quite a bit. Of course, Vcc was 1.0V for this model, and I can't see them scaling that far below this. That will limit how low the power can go, but it's still conceivable that a K7 variety can compete with the high end of Atom TDP. Unfortunately, Intel will raise the bar a lot higher with the Moorestown platform.



Future Imageon products ( to be released in 2009 ) will incorporate an x86 core ( Bobcat IIRC )

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3050&p=8

That's what I consider a true attack on the cellphone market.



So AMD are the "true innovators", and yet they are losing out in the market place. Perhaps you should think for a bit about why this is.

Being an innovator and being successful are not the same thing.Intel too , has , yet to prove it can go beyond its traditional markets.


It's not obvious to me, and I think once the playing field is leveled, you will be eating crow for this remark.

Even with going by Intel's own prediction on G45 vs. older products , I won't.

It's a balancing act, for sure. But in the case of Poulsbo, it might have been the right thing. We'll only know in hind sight. As it is, I think the power characteristics for both Atom and its chipset are quite competitive for the current environment.

The current environment is one artificially created by Intel , MIDs.


What makes you think they didn't intend for the MID market in the first place, rather than just as an interim? I would personally like a Mobile Internet Device with the capabilities of a PC and the form factor of a man's wallet. You talk about Intel lacking innovation, but this time it's right in front of your face and you can't recognize it.

Well , that's the point.Why wasn't Intel more aggressive in its specifications for ATOM ?


In terms of Vista, I agree, but as for Linux, I think that's ideal for this market. I think it has far more capabilities than the ARM operating systems - including features that they will have to painstakingly add over time. Intel has the advantage of a rich ecosystem right out of the gate. I think Mobile Linux is key, and Intel is doing the right thing by investing in it.

True.

[mmoy]

> In terms of Vista, I agree, but as for Linux, I think
> that's ideal for this market. I think it has far more
> capabilities than the ARM operating systems - including
> features that they will

If Apple came out with another MID, say something bigger than the iPhone and iPod Touch, I have no doubt that they could sell a million of them in the first quarter. Whether they use the iPod touch interface or put the full blown Mac OSX on it. Mac OSX is a much lighter OS than Windows Vista or XP.