Engineers Explain 45nm Delays, Errata
January 16, 2008 10:32 AM
comment(s) - last by
Engineers blame simulation for quad-core "showstopper"
More than a few people noticed Intel's roadmap originally slated 45nm
desktop quad-core processors for January, only to have the company change the hard launch date to a not-so-firm "Q1 2008." So what happened? In a series of interviews, the tale of quad-core
began to unfold.
Processor engineers, speaking on background, detailed the problem. "Intel is very sensitive to mean time to failures. During a simulation, at high clock frequencies, engineers noticed an increase of potential failures after a designated amount of time."
He continues, "This is not acceptable for desktop customers that require longterm stability. It's a showstopper."
Previous reports of errata degrading the L2 and L3 cache performance were described as "false" -- desktop
processors do not even have L3 cache. Microcode and BIOS updates issued by Intel since November do not fix or address the "showstopper" bug affecting the launch of the
quad-core Q9300, Q9450 and Q9550 processors
The condition does not affect Xeon quad-core processors. Xeon uses a different stepping than the quad-core processors, which fixes this simulated condition. The quad-core 45nm Extreme Edition processor
launched in November
is also unaffected.
The company would not detail when the processors, originally scheduled for a January 20 launch but announced at CES last week, will see the light of day. Conservative estimates from ASUS and Gigabyte put the re-launch sometime in February. Intel completely removed its January 20 launch from its December 2007 roadmap and has not issued a new roadmap since.
Intel spokesman Dan Snyder says more. "We publicly claimed we will launch its 45nm mainstream processors in Q1 2008, and that's exactly what we did." In fact, the company announced 16 new 45nm processors last week; most of which already shipped to manufacturers -- with the exception of the quad-core desktop variants affected by the showstopper simulation bug.
Taiwanese media was
quick to pin the simulated problem on complacency and lack of competition from AMD
. Intel employees quickly denied the allegation, with the additional claim that the report was "humorous."
At CES last week, Snyder elaborates. "The tick-tock model prevents Intel from missing its launch dates. If the 'tock' team misses a target date, it doesn't affect the 'tick' team."
Tick-tock, the strategy of alternating cycles of architecture change and process shrink, became official company policy on January 1, 2006.
As to why the new Macbook Airs still use the 65nm Core 2 Duo processors?
Even after Foxconn alluded the new notebooks would get 45nm treatment
? Another Intel spokesman declined to respond, only stating, "Our partners are free to choose any of Intel's currently supported processors."
Anand Shimpi explores this more
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RE: I call BS
1/16/2008 11:08:49 AM
I've seen this bug blamed on everything from L2 design to chipsets to ambient radiation. I grilled Intel on pretty much every angle I could come up with, and the simulated MTTF is pretty much the answer they kept coming back to.
RE: I call BS
1/16/2008 1:39:01 PM
Is it possible that maybe that really is the problem?
RE: I call BS
1/16/2008 2:10:35 PM
We were hearing its related to the 1600mhz FSB.
The best reasoning we heard was Intel wants the 1600Mhz FSB to prevent overclockers as much as possible. If they use the 1333FSB they have to obviously increase the multiplier allowed making all the chips great overclockers. Basically drop the multiplier and increase the FSB up easy enough since mobo's chips have a good amount of overhead. If they are able to sell the chips at 1600mhz FSB this will limit overclocking because the chips are running near top FSB speed and can lock the multiplier lower. But not all the chips run 100% stable over time at this speed. If you look at the 45nm chips even the low end is a very good overclocker because of the FSB overhead. If Intel can use the higher FSB and lock the multiplier lower then more people would be required to purchase the higher cost chips to really get higher speed. It also allows Intel to sell 1600Mhz certified mobos with their new chipsets. Its a two sell approach your buy a new chip and to take advantage of it you need to buy a new mobo. We know FSB can go higher but it may not be 100% stable for server use with lousy cooling for them to release the chips.
Like you we've heard numerous reasons. One where hot spotting is causing the chips poof.
But who knows what the truth is.
"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser
Intel "Launches" 16 New Processors
January 8, 2008, 3:52 AM
DigiTimes Alleges Intel Launch Delay Conspiracy Theory
December 19, 2007, 12:58 PM
Intel Officially Launches 45nm "Penryn" Achitecture
November 12, 2007, 4:13 PM
Intel Preps 45nm Quad-core Desktop Launch
September 28, 2007, 4:44 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Microsoft Surface Pro 3 - Battery Issue Fixed
August 30, 2016, 6:30 AM
First Apple Computer Auctions for $815,000
August 27, 2016, 7:51 AM
Lenovo vs. Asus vs. HP - Best Laptop Under $500.00
August 19, 2016, 4:00 AM
Best Router for Your Home Network (Under $200.00)
August 6, 2016, 9:51 PM
5 Top Rated Printers for Home or Small Office
July 29, 2016, 10:44 PM
Most Popular Articles
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM
Latest Blog Posts
Who is in Risk of Getting Oral Cancer?
Sep 23, 2016, 6:02 AM
France Bans Plastic Eating Utensils in Restaurants
Sep 18, 2016, 10:49 AM
Progress Against Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Sep 17, 2016, 5:30 AM
Apple Watch Series 2 - Number 1 in the Customer Satisfaction.
Sep 7, 2016, 6:19 PM
First Self-Driving Car debut on the streets of Singapore
Aug 28, 2016, 4:10 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information