Yes, but the article said Clarkdale and Lynnfield were going to be used in Notebooks. He was wrong, it is Clarksfield and Arrandale, although I guess they are just derivatives of the desktop versions.
Yes, but the article said Clarkdale and Lynnfield were going to be used in Notebooks. He was wrong, it is Clarksfield and Arrandale, although I guess they are just derivatives of the desktop versions.
Does anyone have any idea if Core i3 will support Virtualization? Lack of VT in low end Intel parts was one of the bigger reasons why I went with AMD.
The latest "news" from Digitimes has Clarkdale in Q1 2010. So your answer is spot on.
Found this chart of Clarkdale specs and prices, for me the $87 Pentium is the most appealing.
Always amazes me how Intel takes the same die and through validation and binning (which you previously explained) creates so many variations at such wide price points. Theirs a 3X price range for a ~50% performance boost.
So a month after saying they have brought it forward to q409, they push it back to q110.
Basically what they did was eliminate havendale under the guise of having a really mature 32nm process, then one month later they delay the 32nm parts back to their original release dates. I guess Havendale didn't work out for them and they didn't want to admit failure.
Seems to me like they had planned this from the start, which would also explain why all the leaked roadmaps had westmere in 2010 and not 09. I just hope this means January 2010 and not any later, because Lenovos leaked roadmap showed a full refresh of their entire lineup to transition to westmere in January 2010.
Intel really really sucks at getting stuff done on time. Banias was late, Dothan was late, Yonah was late, three chips in a row were several months late, it was pathetic. They managed to release merom on time, but with the latest delay, merom seems like the exception as opposed to the new rule.
Basically what they did was eliminate havendale under the guise of having a really mature 32nm process, then one month later they delay the 32nm parts back to their original release dates. I guess Havendale didn't work out for them and they didn't want to admit failure.
Seems to me like they had planned this from the start, which would also explain why all the leaked roadmaps had westmere in 2010 and not 09. I just hope this means January 2010 and not any later, because Lenovos leaked roadmap showed a full refresh of their entire lineup to transition to westmere in January 2010.
Intel really really sucks at getting stuff done on time. Banias was late, Dothan was late, Yonah was late, three chips in a row were several months late, it was pathetic. They managed to release merom on time, but with the latest delay, merom seems like the exception as opposed to the new rule.
What a weird post, clearly Denithor had you pegged as a mindless Intel basher in this thread.
When you're the market leader the concept of early or late in meaningless. You set the events based on maximizing profit, not an arbitrary schedule. From my perspective, Intel's Tick-Tock strategy is amazingly precise, after all this IS rocket science!!! Turning on 32nm fabs is hardly child's play, if it were AMD et al would all have producing 32nm fabs as we speak.
Its unfortunate, but the shoe does fit the continuing trend now.
drizek none of this digitimes stuff in this thread has anything to do with Intel's internal roadmaps, external roadmaps, official roadmaps, implied roadmaps, etc.
We (us lowly forum members) are speculating on someone elses speculation (digitimes, fudzilla, TheInq, goto-san, etc) and at best all this speculation will lead to is the right answer for all the wrong reasons.
Uhm, really? I'd love to disagree with this forum's growing sentiment regarding your apparant bias against Intel, all you need do here is supply some links that show proof Intel was late with Banias, Dothan and Yonah.
(And late means it was released after Intel said it would be released, not after some d-bag on a blog said it was supposed to be released because he felt like it should have been released earlier than it really was. I await delivery of your links.)
Yes, Phenom I was a massive failure, but Phenom II was extremely well executed.
ATI and Nvidia for the most part have gotten it together. They release on time and have actual availability on launch(most of the time anyway).
ATI and Nvidia for the most part have gotten it together. They release on time and have actual availability on launch(most of the time anyway).
Like I said earlier, I am in the market for a laptop. I really like Intels nehalem based processors, but I don't like the mixed signals. Intel said westmere was coming in Q4(specifically, October), that is straight from the horses mouth. Everyone else says 2010, including this latest article by digitimes. I guess we don't know who is correct, so I will reserve judgment(well, retract judgment and then reserve it). That said, I think it is wrong for intel to keep stringing consumers along(like AMD did with phenom) because their roadmaps affect when and what I purchase. If they release in October like they said they would originally, then fine. If they delay it until november, that is more than understandable. If they put out a press release in the next few days announcing a delay, then that would be annoying, but also understandable. But if in September they say "oh, btw, its going to be in 2010" then that would be disingenuous of them. I put off buying a laptop earlier with the expectation that I would be able to get Arrandale in October(partly based on Anands recommendation).
I was burned before too, I was expecting Yonah in the Fall of 05, I waited for it, it didn't come, and when I found a good deal on dothan I bought it. I don't regret getting the dothan but if I had known that Yonah wasn't coming I would have bought it earlier. In this case, I think you are right that my expectations were basically just from stuff I read on forums. Dothan really was delayed though http://news.cnet.com/Intel-to-...00-1006_3-5141239.html
I think the delay in dothan resulted in intel pushing back yonah from the original release date, but then meeting their revised release date.
I can't find much info about banias, I guess it really wasn't on people's radars at the time. I might have been wrong about that, too.
I'm sorry I sound like an anti-intel fanboy, I guess I got carried away. If it makes anyone feel any better, I would never buy an AMD based laptop(except for maybe a Neo based one), and intels nehalem architecture is way better than phenom(although I prefer the price/performance of AMD). AMD also really massacred the whole Phenom I launch, although I didn't care about that as much since I wasn't in the market for a computer at the time. Still, between the huge delays, the crappy clock speeds and the TLB errata, it was a really low point for them.
As for the comment about Intel being the leader and not needing to meet deadlines, that maybe technically true, but I still have the right to find it annoying. I was also annoyed when they delayed Harry Potter from last November to now even though it was finished, just so they could make more money. Yes, it is a good business decision, but it isn't good for the consumer.
Edit: It is my understanding that the Tick-Tock strategy was implemented as a result of the dothan delays. Merom and Penryn really did arrive on time and do as well as expected, so props to intel for that. Of course, the success of these previous two, as well as news of 32nms maturity really convinced me of a late 2009 release date.
I was burned before too, I was expecting Yonah in the Fall of 05, I waited for it, it didn't come, and when I found a good deal on dothan I bought it. I don't regret getting the dothan but if I had known that Yonah wasn't coming I would have bought it earlier. In this case, I think you are right that my expectations were basically just from stuff I read on forums. Dothan really was delayed though http://news.cnet.com/Intel-to-...00-1006_3-5141239.html
I think the delay in dothan resulted in intel pushing back yonah from the original release date, but then meeting their revised release date.
I can't find much info about banias, I guess it really wasn't on people's radars at the time. I might have been wrong about that, too.
I'm sorry I sound like an anti-intel fanboy, I guess I got carried away. If it makes anyone feel any better, I would never buy an AMD based laptop(except for maybe a Neo based one), and intels nehalem architecture is way better than phenom(although I prefer the price/performance of AMD). AMD also really massacred the whole Phenom I launch, although I didn't care about that as much since I wasn't in the market for a computer at the time. Still, between the huge delays, the crappy clock speeds and the TLB errata, it was a really low point for them.
As for the comment about Intel being the leader and not needing to meet deadlines, that maybe technically true, but I still have the right to find it annoying. I was also annoyed when they delayed Harry Potter from last November to now even though it was finished, just so they could make more money. Yes, it is a good business decision, but it isn't good for the consumer.
Edit: It is my understanding that the Tick-Tock strategy was implemented as a result of the dothan delays. Merom and Penryn really did arrive on time and do as well as expected, so props to intel for that. Of course, the success of these previous two, as well as news of 32nms maturity really convinced me of a late 2009 release date.
as i recall, yonah was so early, it beat cedarmill to market, even though cedarmill was supposed to be the 65nm lead vehicle.
I think you'll be well served getting an Arrandale laptop, it'll set new performance and battery life benchmarks. Arrandale and Clarkdale share the same die, separated only by validation and binning. My guess is Arrandale will follow Clarkdale simply for higher yields. As 32nm matures Arrandale will quickly follow. You simply have to be patient, no amount of fretting on this forum will speed up your new laptop. The best use of this forum is which Arrandale chip should you get.
Good for the consumer?!? The average consumer has never heard of AnandTech and if you ask the average consumer about Arrandale, not 1 in 100 would have a clue. You are NOT the average consumer.
In any case, the "consumer" in Intel's eyes is HP, Dell, Acer and Best Buy, not you or I. As idc pointed out all the rumors and half-truths you read on this site are simply for you to read and process with a very large grain of salt. To attach late or early based on things you read here says you still believe in the Tooth Fairy.
Originally posted by: dmens
as i recall, yonah was so early, it beat cedarmill to market, even though cedarmill was supposed to be the 65nm lead vehicle.
Yes, Yonah came before Presler, but not because it was early.
Link
Edit:
While I may have been incorrect in my original statement, I don't know why everyone jumped at me. The fact is that before Merom, Intel had a reputation for not meeting deadlines. The Tick Tock strategy was a response to this, and yes, up until now, it has worked quite well. All I was saying was that I don't want them to go back to the days before Core 2.
I agree with what you said but I think in Q4 we will have "that without precedence" launch mainly for 2 reasons:
1. The last 3-4 years (Q1 2006 90nm) we have a manufacturing cycle acceleration with many companies like TSMC, UMC and Intel is stack at 2 years cycle, so they starting to catch up.
(I think one of the reasons Intel made the deal with TSMC regarding Atom system-on-a-chip silicon is to cut resources from TSMC and stall them)
2. they want to crash Nvidia (it become too powerful for it's own good)
Nvidia since probably won't have an IGP or a chipset in general for all the new Intel processors (CPUs with integrated bus controller), their last chance is ION2 (I mean the successor of 9300/9400) which when paired with a decent Core 2 or Core quad it is a good solution.
Intel effectively with their move cuts Nvidia market into 6000 series or below (can I have an ION2 and a celeron 1600 please?) since in Q4 we will have nehalem derivatives in all the other price range.
I know it is really early, but has anyone heard anything about pin compatibility between westmere and sandy bridge? IIRC, Yonah and Merom were compatible.
That's right out of the conspiracy theory book. Doesn't fly with me. Rather all those SOC derivatives of Atom are too low volume for Intel and would be in the 10's - 100's of thousands, whereas Intel has shipped 10's of millions of Atoms. I believe all Atom's are the same die and the different SKUs are via validation and binning. IIRC, Atom has the largest profit of any Intel CPU.
taltamir
Lifer
- Mar 21, 2004
- 13,576
- 6
- 76
the reason anand gave was that it opens up some legal avenues in regards to certain integrators. intel wants to protect its IP and still offer something appealing to customers looking to integrate atom into certain devices.
besides, conspiracies happen all the time, and people are arrested and tried for them too. It is the INSANE conspiracy theories that you should avoid (aka, the government is mind controlling me via rays from aliens and aluminum foil protects me).
Look up the ram cartel, real enough conspiracy right there.
besides, conspiracies happen all the time, and people are arrested and tried for them too. It is the INSANE conspiracy theories that you should avoid (aka, the government is mind controlling me via rays from aliens and aluminum foil protects me).
Look up the ram cartel, real enough conspiracy right there.
Thanks.
I think it is a risky move for different reasons.
TSMC doesn't have funds problems (although with the 40nm fiasco they had less net profit than before and they demoted Tsai into promoting him (sic) with the role to run solar market business, they just fire the regular folks)
regarding the demand and production, already TSMC is overstretched with their human resources and structure and expansion they have
So although (like you said) Intel has the capacity to shipp 10's of millions of Atoms they choose the 10's - 100's of thousands to sent them to TSMC.
becauce they are nice guys? (they said to Chai, Can?t We All Just Move Along?)
becauce they have bigger things to concetrate? (than the CPU aimed to take the mobile market in the future?)
Doesn't this hurt your own point?
It's pretty clear why Intel chose to leverage TSMC for SOC derivatives of Atom. There always has been, currently is, and most likely will always be a significant gap in the process technology capabilities of Intel versus TSMC (and most others in the high-performance MPU market).
By putting customers of their atom SOC into TSMC's fabs instead of their own fabs Intel discreetly manages to keep their own internal atom-based SOC designs that much farther advanced and at an advantage over any other atom-based SOC design that it might eventually encounter out in the marketplace.
(say Nvidia makes an atom-based SOC for ION2, with the TSMC deal the power/performance of atom-based SOC's coming out of TSMC for NV won't be able to touch Intel's with a AAA battery)
(PS - I know this because this was partially our motivation at TI when we qualified three foundries at a time - TSMC, UMC, and Chartered for example - for the same tech node and production of the same mobile wireless DSP...we kept the competitive stuff inhouse and only pushed to the foundries the stuff we weren't concerned about bleeding over and being used by qualcomm and the rest of our fabless competitors)
There really isn't such a thing as being stretched too thin in the foundry world, everything is prioritized and the top priorities get the resources. The only way atom-based SOC would consume TSMC resources is if a customer signed up and was driving the need for it at TSMC, then it would get the priority and resources commensurate with the expected sales volume, etc, that TSMC would forecast for supporting the product line.
Standard resource management in the foundry world where your business is judiciously resourcing the 100's of projects your potential customers want you to make be your number one priority every day.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter