• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

More Intel Bay Trail details

e31.jpg


Good to know all netbooks on display now have been dead on arrival for the past year or so.

Intel is putting some serious development into Atom
 
Nice to see support for 64-bit OS again. Unless I'm mistaken the last couple generations of Atom have not supported this?
 
2is said:
I'd say Atom progression (or escalation) has been rather slow. Up until now anyway.
Click to expand...

exactly, it felt that they were dragging their feet with Atom then BOOM this gets announced.

Seems that netbooks are being reborn into tablets.
take away the keyboard, put a SSD and a touch screen....walla new product charge $400 for it
 
happysmiles said:
exactly, it felt that they were dragging their feet with Atom then BOOM this gets announced.

Seems that netbooks are being reborn into tablets.
take away the keyboard, put a SSD and a touch screen....walla new product charge $400 for it
Click to expand...

I would love to see a netbook size device with something like this, if it is a significant improvement over atom. I really like the HP dm1z or whatever the new model name is, but it is kind of hard to find and seems overpriced and a bit low on cpu performance. If intel could come up with something with both decent graphics and cpu performance for a netbook type device that would be great. I have a tablet, and have very mixed feelings about it. It is convenient for light usage, but has a lot of limitations.

However, Intel on the low end is kind of like AMD has been on the high end lately, lots of announcements and projections, but the hardware has not backed up what they were projecting. Maybe now they will get serious about low power devices.
 
4 Execution units sounds pretty beefy for atom.

How fast can we expect this new atom iGPU to be compared to Clarkdale/Arrandale iGPU?
 
frozentundra123456 said:
I would love to see a netbook size device with something like this, if it is a significant improvement over atom. I really like the HP dm1z or whatever the new model name is, but it is kind of hard to find and seems overpriced and a bit low on cpu performance. If intel could come up with something with both decent graphics and cpu performance for a netbook type device that would be great. I have a tablet, and have very mixed feelings about it. It is convenient for light usage, but has a lot of limitations.

However, Intel on the low end is kind of like AMD has been on the high end lately, lots of announcements and projections, but the hardware has not backed up what they were projecting. Maybe now they will get serious about low power devices.
Click to expand...

"netbooks" with 11 inch 1300x768 screens and celeron/pentium cpus would revive the netbook category. it isnt that people lost interest in machines that size, people were just dissatisfied with the performance of atom and 1024x600 resolutions.
 
Computer Bottleneck said:
4 Execution units sounds pretty beefy for atom.

How fast can we expect this new atom iGPU to be compared to Clarkdale/Arrandale iGPU?
Click to expand...

were it says that there is 4 Execution units?
i must be blind, but i can only find 4 cores

EDIT...

LOL, it's for the GPU...hehehe...i thouhgt that it had 4 Execution units at each cpu XD
anyway...
jaguar will probably use CGN based igp, that is 50% faster in the same bandwidth/shader count/clock...(probably more with 12.7 drivers)
 
Last edited:
happysmiles said:
Seems that netbooks are being reborn into tablets.
take away the keyboard, put a SSD and a touch screen....walla new product charge $400 for it
Click to expand...


Exactly, at least the tablets come with good screens. As the atom performance increases win8 tablets may be enough for most consumers who just browse facebook and watch video streams on thier computers
 
OBLAMA2009 said:
atom is just an awful performing chip
Click to expand...

? Atom is just fine for its power-usage and die-size.

It did get a bad reputation on debut because it was paired with a ridiculously high power-consuming platform/chipset which left people with the perception that Atom itself had high power usage.

I'll keep coming back to the following though - Intel's problem is not performance, or power-usage; rather, their problem is gross margins.

They cannot do what AMD or Qualcomm or TI can do, they can't create a product which competes in a marketspace that at best entitles them to 45% gross margins.

It is what killed their foray in HDTV in 2005, and it is what killed their foray into discrete GPU's in 2009. The viability of Atom will be determined solely by its ability to generate 60% gross margins.

If it doesn't, or if a roadmap to getting it there doesn't gel, then Intel won't pursue it regardless of its performance.
 
Idontcare said:
They cannot do what AMD or Qualcomm or TI can do, they can't create a product which competes in a marketspace that at best entitles them to 45% gross margins.
Click to expand...

IDC,

Looking at these charts, Qualcomm is actually very close to Intel in gross profit margin.

http://ycharts.com/companies/INTC/gross_profit_margin

http://ycharts.com/companies/QCOM/gross_profit_margin

Surprising!..... and this makes the battle between Intel atom and market leader Qualcomm even more interesting IMO.
 
Last edited:
Computer Bottleneck said:
IDC,

Looking at these charts, Qualcomm actually has some really strong profit margins. (In fact, as a trend over the last few years they are definitely beating Intel.)

http://ycharts.com/companies/INTC/gross_profit_margin

http://ycharts.com/companies/QCOM/gross_profit_margin
Click to expand...

It is not that they have strong profit margins, it is that their analysts (big factor in institutional shareholders decisions, which determines the float) do not expect/demand such lofty gross margins on a continual basis for perpetuity.

Intel's current share price, and its current institutional holdings, is strongly dependent on Intel continuing to give the impression to its analysts that Intel will be able to maintain its 60% gross margin leadership. (Microsoft is in similar boat with its 80% GM expectations)

This hamstrings Intel's decision makers (CEO and BoD) in terms of the markets it can pursue, products it invests R&D dollars into developing for sales 4 yrs from now, etc.

No CEO of Intel is going to go to the Board of Directors to pitch a plan to invest billions of dollars into developing a product that at best can be expected to command 45% gross margins. Such a plan will be dead on arrival with the BoD because it would be a death-knell for the shareprice of INTC.

Qualcomm's CEO and BoD don't have that issue, neither does AMD. They can cook up plans to go after markets that have 35% gross margins and the shareholders would be elated just to hear that more profits are planned to be rolling in.

Intel cannot simply go after more profit, the quality of the profit matters. If it isn't high margin stuff then their shareprice will respond negatively to such a development. It is a unique golden handcuff placed on effective monopolies.

To my knowledge only Microsoft and Intel have this boundary condition right now, but it is to their competitors advantage because it creates some crumbs that fall off the table which enables them to stay alive in Intel's wake.
 
quoted from article linked in OP:

Since the Bay Trail platform is replacing so many of the older Atom platforms, it has to be versatile: to that end, it supports a plethora of interfaces, including SATA 2.0, USB 2.0, USB 3.0, Secure Digital Input Output (SDIO), the Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) bus, I²C, I²S, and UART, which covers just about all of the major input and output interfaces across desktops, netbooks, and tablets.
Click to expand...

Why only include SATA 2.0 (3 Gbps), and not SATA 3.x (6 Gbps)? Or, would that simply be overkill for the devices intended for Bay Trail?
 
Idontcare said:
No CEO of Intel is going to go to the Board of Directors to pitch a plan to invest billions of dollars into developing a product that at best can be expected to command 45% gross margins. Such a plan will be dead on arrival with the BoD because it would be a death-knell for the shareprice of INTC.
Click to expand...

They don't have much choice on the matter because ARM is too big of a threat. Intel understands this now and is acting accordingly. Getting Apple and Samsung to use their chips is going to be difficult though.
 
jpiniero said:
They don't have much choice on the matter because ARM is too big of a threat. Intel understands this now and is acting accordingly. Getting Apple and Samsung to use their chips is going to be difficult though.
Click to expand...


The Apple iphone has a strong profit margin.

So lets see what kind of smartphone SOC Intel starts to put together. With the possibility of a very strong process tech lead by 2016, they might do pretty well against Apple and Samsung.
 
Last edited:
jpiniero said:
They don't have much choice on the matter because ARM is too big of a threat. Intel understands this now and is acting accordingly. Getting Apple and Samsung to use their chips is going to be difficult though.
Click to expand...

Agreed. 60% profit margin may sound better than 45% profit margin, but when sales for the 45% part start growing while the 60% part starts shrinking, I'm sure Intel and their analysts will be singing a different tune.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top