backtop

Print 39 comment(s) - last by theapparition.. on Jul 2 at 10:32 AM
Intel follows through with pledge made in September

At last year’s Intel Developer Forum, Intel pledged to ship 1 million quad-core processors before AMD ships a single Barcelona processor. Intel reached this milestone today, approximately two months ahead of schedule.

“Since we started shipping quad core processors last November, we have already sold well over a million parts thanks to our extensive 65nm factory network,” Intel PR Manager Dan Snyder said. “And with 45nm just around the corner, we expect the ramp to continue well.”

Intel’s quad-core product lineup currently consists of mid-to-high-end models for desktops, workstations and servers. The company plans to slash prices on Core 2 Quad and Core 2 Extreme processors come July 22, 2007. Price cuts for the workstation and server Intel Xeon processors will come shortly afterwards.  

Intel plans to penetrate the enterprise server markets with quad-core Tigerton-based Xeon 7300-sequence processors later this quarter. The upcoming Intel Xeon 7300-sequence processors can scale up to 32 processors and utilizes a new point-to-point bus system that allows each processor to have independent communication with the chipset.

Later in 2008, Intel plans to introduce the new Tukwila quad-core Itanium processors. Tukwila is Intel’s first processor to take advantage of the new common system interface, or CSI. As Intel moves the Xeon product lineup to the CSI bus, the Xeon and Itanium product lineups will begin to share architecture similarities.

AMD’s quad-core plans lie solely with its upcoming Barcelona architecture. Barcelona is a native quad-core processor with four cores on the same die. AMD is having troubles scaling Barcelona, with Computex demonstrations at 1.6 GHz and an upcoming launch at 2.0 GHz. The troubled Barcelona failed to impress with initial benchmark numbers earlier this month as well.

Quad-core Barcelona targets the workstation and server markets. AMD plans to launch desktop Stars variants next quarter under the new Phenom FX and Phenom X4 brands. The new Phenom FX processors will find home in AMD’s upcoming FASN8 second-generation 4x4 platform, based around the upcoming RD790 chipset.

Expect Intel to continue shipping 65nm quad-core processors this quarter and new 45nm Penryn quad-core processors in Q4’2007.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Value
By EndPCNoise on 6/29/2007 5:51:14 PM , Rating: 3
When the Q6600's price is cut to $266, supposedly later this month, the value for performance per dollar will nearly double.




RE: Value
By TomZ on 6/29/2007 6:03:25 PM , Rating: 5
Yes, and just keep thinking in my own mind that the $266 price for Q6600 is a nail in the casket for AMD. It seems to me that AMD really needs to price Barcelona quite a bit above that price point in order to recover R&D investments and to generally become profitable again. But it seems like Intel's pricing is not going to allow that to be possible.

I also worry about AMD having lower yield having all four cores on one die, as well as their apparent inability to scale Barcelona - I doubt it can be competitive at <= 2GHz.


RE: Value
By Targon on 6/29/2007 7:16:01 PM , Rating: 5
Recovering R&D for Barcelona will come over time, even if it takes more time due to lower prices. The design differences between K8 and K10 are the ones I am talking about. There is also further refinement of the 65nm process, and other things that are seen as a part of the Barcelona R&D costs.

If you take the process improvements alone, and applied them to the current K8 processors, it would still take some time to cover that R&D cost. The L3 cache, and other design improvements would also end up being covered automatically over time, because the work done on them will be applied to ALL future processor designs from AMD.

The big issue will be that Barcelona doesn't look like it will provide a huge surge in sales until the clock speeds ramp up to at least the 2.2GHz mark. If there is a pre-clock improvement in performance, then those upgrading from a 2.2GHz processor would see a full benefit due to the extra cores and tweaks, with no trade-offs(besides cost).

Think about it, going from a 2.2GHz dual-core to a 2.2GHz quad core, even for gamers would at least provide the same performance in applications that don't have a multi-threaded design, probably with a tiny improvement due to more background processes running on other cores. If you have a 2.6GHz dual-core processor today, unless you run apps that are multi-threaded and can take advantage of the extra cores, you won't want to go to a 2.4GHz or less clocked quad-core processor. Now, it would be interesting to see if AMD can release higher-clocked dual-core processors based on the K10 design with higher clock speeds by the end of the year. That would provide a faster return on that R&D investment. I figure, if quad-core is at 2.2GHz by November, a dual-core K10 should be able to get to 2.6GHz, and that WOULD sell.


RE: Value
By Marcus Pollice on 6/30/2007 7:00:29 AM , Rating: 4
What you are not taking into account here are the improvements AMD made to each core, which further raise IPC compared to K8. It remains to be seen how much more performance Barcelona can deliver compared to K8.

All early benchmarks we know to this date are either too synthetic or not in comparison with AMDs previous architecture.


RE: Value
By Dactyl on 6/30/2007 3:17:05 PM , Rating: 1
Barcelona, clock-for-clock and core-for-core, has not been shown to be any faster than K8.

I will believe it when I see it.


RE: Value
By TomZ on 6/29/2007 8:09:58 PM , Rating: 2
By defter on 6/29/2007 4:51:20 PM, Rating: 2

Intel will introduce 50W 2GHz quad core Xeon to spoil the party in August:

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2007/06/29/intel_...


RE: Value
By bob661 on 7/1/2007 12:47:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Intel will introduce 50W 2GHz quad core Xeon to spoil the party in August:
And how is this a surprise? Intel always does this. Unless you're dropping a Xeon in your box, this is irrelevant anyways. Hell, we're in the market for a new server or two at work and I STILL won't buy the new Xeon. I'll let you guinea pig it first then you can report your findings for me. We'll stick to the tried and true CPU's thanks. We're a business, not a group of fanboi's.


RE: Value
By ShapeGSX on 7/1/2007 3:00:28 PM , Rating: 2
"Hell, we're in the market for a new server or two at work and I STILL won't buy the new Xeon. I'll let you guinea pig it first then you can report your findings for me. We'll stick to the tried and true CPU's thanks. "

So you wouldn't buy a Barcelona, either, eh?

The new Xeon is the same silicon that was being sold before, just tweaked for low power. No doubt it is a more tired and true solution than Barcelona at this point.


RE: Value
By TomZ on 7/1/2007 9:58:43 PM , Rating: 1
Barcelons and Xeon are both targeted for servers and workstations - why would you consider Barcelona but not Xeon? Your other comments seem to imply that you don't understand that Xeon is x86 - you know it is, right? What great risk is one taking with Xeon, or are you just spreading FUD?


$266??
By natebsi on 6/29/2007 10:16:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Expect Intel to continue shipping 65nm quad-core processors this quarter...


Lol! I fully expected them to stopping shipping them once they reached the 1mil mark! :) Well, it was funny to me anyway...

Anyway, the Q6600's are going down to 266??? I very nearly pulled the trigger at Newegg today getting one of these. Anyone know when this is going to happen?




RE: $266??
By TomZ on 6/29/2007 10:21:32 PM , Rating: 2
RE: $266??
By natebsi on 6/29/2007 10:25:59 PM , Rating: 1
Wow! Thats very good to know! Thanks Tom.


One word...
By KeithTalent on 6/29/2007 6:14:04 PM , Rating: 2
July22nd!!!

:-)




RE: One word...
By drunkenmastermind on 6/29/2007 7:38:17 PM , Rating: 2
happy with my 6700 C2D and will be VERY happy to drop a QX6700 in the system :)


well, this is news?
By sprockkets on 6/30/2007 6:09:54 PM , Rating: 2
Intel has been advertising here on this site with "A different kind of benchmark," and upon clicking on it shows how they sold 1 million quad core processors. So not sure why you are just posting this today when they have been showing that for weeks.

I do not care about any new this or that in the market. That new mini-itx board from Intel with a 1.33ghz Celeron Yonah based processor with it taking about 20 watts to run is what I'm looking for, not quad core so you can hurry up and wait for the internet to arrive. Besides, people are going to desktops and thus spells less sales for people like me, but higher costs to repair :).




There is a big difference between shipped and SOLD.
By Beenthere on 6/29/07, Rating: -1
By TomZ on 6/29/2007 8:22:05 PM , Rating: 2
Have you got a picture of the warehouse where Intel is hiding the 1M quads? :o)

It's ironic you accuse Intel of FUD, with statements that are themselves pure FUD and completely devoid of facts, links, logic, etc.


By theprodigalrebel on 6/29/2007 8:30:51 PM , Rating: 3
With all due respect, you are depriving some poor village of its idiot.


By zsdersw on 7/1/2007 7:00:24 AM , Rating: 2
I don't think any respect is due. :)


By Scabies on 6/29/2007 8:38:01 PM , Rating: 2
SOMEONE missed the whole Conroe event


By Treckin on 6/29/2007 9:02:31 PM , Rating: 2
so long as intel doesnt pull an amd on us....
People should realize when taking the situation in that there is a supreme difference between a native quadcore and a dual die, dual core chip. Even intel has acknowledged that AMD has bit off more than either of them could chew with that one. Unfourtunetly, they had already sunk billions into it by the time they could logically abandon their investment and go the way of the qx series. No one wants to see a remarkably weak architecture done twice on one proc...

I say we should wait until we get the damn thing to Anand before we start calling brimstone and boiling blood...


By clnee55 on 6/30/2007 3:07:46 AM , Rating: 3
"People should realize when taking the situation in that there is a supreme difference between a native quadcore and a dual die, dual core chip."

The differences are

quadcore: Low yield, slow speed, delay, expensive

Dual Die: High yield, same speed, ahead of schedule and cheap


By knowom on 6/30/2007 10:20:48 AM , Rating: 2
AMD should work on making a dual die quad-core as well 8 cores on one cpu. With a 4x4 system you'd end up with 16 cores and with a platform with much better bandwidth saturation as well thanks to hyper transport. I'm sure the server and enthusiast markets would be all over it. I doubt it would be real difficult to accomplish either by comparison.


By TomZ on 6/30/2007 10:38:39 AM , Rating: 2
Having 16 cores is about as useful as owning 16 cars, at least at this point in time.


By knowom on 6/30/2007 5:50:57 PM , Rating: 2
The same could be said about dual and quad-core if you wanted and while it might be the case for some or a lot of people doesn't mean it's the case for everyone. Nor does it mean it'll remain the case in the future either.


By B166ER on 7/1/2007 1:36:11 AM , Rating: 2
You missed the point in that post. 16 cores are not beneficial at this point in time due to the fact that there is virtually NO software that take advantage of such a setup. However, dual and even quad core goodness IS being taken advantage of in some software along with OSes, with quad core being taken advantage of less. To argue that against that is brainless.


By gescom on 7/1/2007 8:40:21 AM , Rating: 2
"You missed the point in that post. 16 cores are not beneficial at this point in time due to the fact that there is virtually NO software that take advantage of such a setup."

Hm, with HD 1920x1080 [and more] format rendering, I really need more cpu-s than 2-4. In postproduction industry there's never enough CPU-s. More!!


By theapparition on 7/2/2007 8:53:11 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You missed the point in that post. 16 cores are not beneficial at this point in time due to the fact that there is virtually NO software that take advantage of such a setup.

I have software that could take advantage of every single one of those 16, or 32, 62.......or even 65,536 cores if it were available. However, this type of software is certainly not mainstream. But to say that virtually NO software can take advantage is not correct. Servers, blades, and industrial computers have been utilizing 16+ cores for decades.

quote:
To argue that against that is brainless.

Hmmmm. All I can say is, try and be objective and fair when making statements, otherwise, you could really look the fool.


By FITCamaro on 7/1/2007 3:39:10 PM , Rating: 2
I could live with owning 16 cars...

67 Camaro
68 Camaro
69 Camaro
87 Buick GNX
89 Corvette ZR1
89 Turbo Trans Am
90 Corvette ZR1
91 Corvette ZR1
91 SLP Firehawk
97 Corvette 6-speed
99 Trans Am WS6 6-speed
99 Camaro SS 6-speed
01 Corvette Z06
02 Camaro SS 6-speed 35th Anniversary Edition
02 Trans Am WS6 Collector's Edition (my dad has one)
07 Corvette Z06

Drive one every day and rotate through them.


By smilingcrow on 7/1/2007 6:13:05 PM , Rating: 3
"67 Camaro
68 Camaro
69 Camaro
87 Buick GNX
89 Corvette ZR1
89 Turbo Trans Am
90 Corvette ZR1
91 Corvette ZR1
91 SLP Firehawk
97 Corvette 6-speed
99 Trans Am WS6 6-speed
99 Camaro SS 6-speed
01 Corvette Z06
02 Camaro SS 6-speed 35th Anniversary Edition
02 Trans Am WS6 Collector's Edition (my dad has one)
07 Corvette Z06"

And not one car that knows how to take a corner properly. :)


By B166ER on 7/2/2007 2:38:56 AM , Rating: 2
The Z06 is the best of the bunch. At least it can halfway compete with what brews overseas, the rest are just heavy muscle. Freakin' 89 Turbo Trans Am? You want ripped Levis, white sunglasses, Party mullet and a Bob Seeger album with that, Macho Man?


By theapparition on 7/2/2007 10:32:20 AM , Rating: 2
Without going into an in-depth car discussion and hi-jacking this thread.......could you please tell me any car that could compete with any on his list, for the same model year, and for the same price? There are certainly better cars, but ones that cost 2-10x from overseas don't count. If I wanted a superb handling autocross car, I'd buy a lotus. So I did. I also sold it 6mos later since it sucks at anything other than autocross. Paper stats are nice for armchair drivers, but until you drive it and have to live with it, they don't mean much.

Some cars handle better, some have higher top speed, and some have better ride quality. But as overall price-performers go, its hard to find anything that compares to f-bodies/mustangs(<-pains me to say but true) in their time. Corvette is another level that overall compares to ANY sports car in the world at any price. It may not win every catagory, but it is very close. Now add the price factor in.

Throw out the Bob Seeger album (replace with Slayer/Metallica) and you have described me in HS (OK, I had black sunglasses.) No turbo '89 pontiac, I had a 91 Camaro Z28. Business in front, party in the back mullet too. What's wrong with that?


By knowyourenemy on 6/29/2007 10:13:13 PM , Rating: 2
Links please.


By nerdye on 6/29/2007 11:28:45 PM , Rating: 2
I don't doubt for a second that 1 million core 2 quads have been sold, cmon, if you need processing power where would you turn? Ya for the everyman out there, sure, most applications are not multithreaded enough to make a difference to warrant the cost, but those that spend 500$ plus for a cpu do so to get what they payed for, and aren't trying to play games of solitaire now! It seems logical to me, to you?


By johnsonx on 6/30/2007 1:43:36 AM , Rating: 3
lol, beenthere never fails to amuse.

Shouldn't your buddy cornfedone be lurking around here somewhere too? Say hi to your dad Cramitpal for me.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=4137&...


By bob661 on 7/1/2007 12:51:03 PM , Rating: 2
Hey! Cramitpal was damn funny!


By RaisedinUS on 6/30/2007 1:22:30 PM , Rating: 1
All the said Intel "FUD" before C2D's were released turned out to be true.
I myself didn't buy into it but hoped it was close to actual performance because I like competition. Only reason I still have my dual core Opteron is because it runs everything I have just fine and I can't justify (to myself, platform change) upgrading just now.
I'm sure this will change in the near future.
All those that said AM2 would "put it to Intel" sure have egg or something that looks like egg on their faces. I just hope for AMD's sake it can pull close to Intel with their latest and greatest.
And before the flame or downrating starts, I have bought and sold AMD since the Athlon XP days. I have an Opteron 1.8@ 3.01 Ghz stable on air, not uncommon.


By Dactyl on 6/30/2007 3:38:30 PM , Rating: 2
their glue-blobs as they are known in the PC industry

Is that the technical term?

I Googled it. I did two searches, one for (Intel "glue-blob") and one for (Intel "glue-blobs").

I found a hit in the xbitlabs forums and a few hits in DT forums. There are no other instances of the term "glue-blob" being used to describe Intel processors.

There is no reason to believe the post at xbitlabs or the posts on DT were made by people in the "PC industry."

As a result Intel has had to do a lot of arm twisting and virtually give the glue-blobs away at fire sale prices.

So why do they cost co much more than Core 2 Duo/Woodcrest? (Conroe/Woodcrest are of course single-die processors, so I don't think you can call them "glue-blobs")

The crying will begin big time for Intel come August but they'll lie thru their teeth for the next two years claiming how well their non-competitive products are selling. Their 10Q reports show the facts and that is that their CPU sales are down, their profits are way down and their ASP's are in the gutter.

I hope the ASP of the Q6600 goes into the gutter sometime next month.


By bob661 on 7/1/2007 12:53:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Intel knows full well Barcelona is going to crush them so Intel is generating all the FUD and mis-information they can via shills.
"That there's funny I don't care who you are."


"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)

Related Articles










botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki