Will Intel release Nehalem this year, at affordable price?

[lopri]

It's known that high-end stuff will come out before the mid-range, right? And separate platform for high vs mid, respectively.

Sucks, but I do have a high expectation for Nehalem. Performance is one thing, and stability another. The stability factors are two-fold.

1) Native quads/octos. Right now the most annoying thing when overclocking Intel quad-cores is the FSB and AGTL+ thingy. No more nonsense fiddling with 4 different voltage values.

2) IMC. The quality of Intel MCH (especially desktop parts) is definitely not up to their CPU standard. This will be a non issue once the memory controllers are inside the CPUs.

I hope there will be as much fun as Socket 939 overclocking once Nehalem platform matures.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: harpoon84

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000
The upcoming Nehalem versions(which looks like 2.66GHz/2.83GHz/3.0GHz/3.2GHz) on the roadmaps just seems to replace the current Penryn based quad cores at the same clock speed. I don't think the prices will be too much different from the previous generations either.

I would think that both the die sizes and the prices will be a bit higher because of all the extra "bits" (IMC, QPI I/O, etc...)

Since when did Intel (or AMD for that matter) price their processors based on die size? I don't see Penryn chips costing less than Kentsfield despite the smaller die. Yes, there is an IMC which increases chip complexity but then mobos will become cheaper to manufacture as there is no NB.

That and also the fact you don't stop selling something you make $100 on just to replace it with something you only make $80 on. Nehalem will cost more to produce, ignoring the R&D costs, etc, but just from the diesize resulting in lower yields.

If the prices are not markedly higher than the replacement Penryn (to compensate for gross margin erosion) then look for them to be in short supply so Intel isn't actually diluting their gross margins with tons of too cheap nehalems.

This is all standard gross margin management, almost kind of a textbook example of it because Intel is operating in a near monopoly position here with no competition in this segment so it truly is self-inflicted GM erosion and sales canabalism. It's a different story of course in the multi-socket segment.

A solid summer so far for Intel: The chip giant blew away Street revenue and EPS expectations for Q2, but gross margins were a bit lower than forecasted. Why? Greater demand for cheap laptops, which include cheaper chips. Guidance for Q3 is solid.

Key Stats:

Q2 Gross Margin: 55.4%, vs. 56% guidance

Q3 Gross Margin Guidance: 58%, vs. 58.2% (FBR)

Full Year Gross Margin: 57%, vs. 57% guidance, FBR

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-...ight%2C-Guidance-Solid

The emphasis on gross margins is clear in Intel's Q2 earnings release. No way this is not being factored into the release timeline and prices (or volumes) for Nehalem.