IDF So Far

[clarkey01]

>?Gelsinger said that we will see a lot of additional Netburst processors in 2005?

Dual core prescotts, call the fire department .


> It is the Itanium, not the Xeon that is being shown dual core.

Which means that perhaps it is HP, and not Intel,
that deserves any kudos for getting this part
done in time for IDF.

> "This is not a race."

This must be Chapter 2 in Intel's new book of how
to run a high-tech biz. Chapter 1, you'll perhaps
recall, was "Performance no longer matters".

> This is a sea change in computing ...

No spit, Sperlock. Moore's Law is on holiday, and
DC is the main game in town. Well, perhaps Intel
will have a
seat at this table a few hands from now.


"This is not a race."

It's only a race when we're winning, and we clearly aren't winning.
Also, I've read that indications are that you will need a dual capable chipset to run a single dual-core chip. Maybe they'll use this as a time to get away from the shared bus design a bit and use a point to point bus for each chip. (like AMD has had since 1999.)

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

We will have dual cores at the IDF (but not the P4's just the Itanium's that only huge iron will look at). We tricked you into thinking that we will have dual core P4's before 2006 at the earliest but it is not a race since we say so. Jesus, has Intel become pretty lame (and they have great products and a Godlike market share) but this last year has kicked them squarely in the n**ts

 

[Drayvn]

Viable Dual cores from Intel 2006....

Viable server dual cores being produced and shipped early next year by AMD with desktop version to follow...

Umm... a year ahead still....

And there is every indications that AMD will nail the timing on the head too, while intel, hmm 2007

 

[mikecel79]

Intel is saying Dual Cores on the desktop by 2005. They also showed a demo of a dual core P4 at the 2nd day of the IDF. So not only do they have the high-end Itanium running dual core but also the x86 platform.
Intel demos dual core, uncorks Napa