backtop


Print 40 comment(s) - last by ceefka.. on Aug 31 at 5:51 AM

Three new Xeons added to the Q4 launch lineup

Intel’s latest roadmap reveals three new Penryn based Xeon models with a higher front-side bus speed – 1600 MHz. The three new 1600 MHz front-side bus processors are available in dual-core and quad-core models. Quad-core Xeon E5472 and E5462 are the first quad-core models to receive the 1600 MHz front-side bus treatment.

The Xeon E5472 features a 3.0 GHz clock speed while the E5462 features a 2.8 GHz clock speed. These models feature 80-watt thermal ratings as designated with the E moniker. Intel plans to release these 1600 MHz front-side bus processors in Q4 2007 with the rest of the Penryn family.

Pricing for the 1600 MHz front-side bus processor starts at $797 for the E5462 and $958 for the E5472, per processor, in 1,000 unit quantities. As far as pricing goes, the Xeon E5472 slots below the 3.16 GHz X5460 while the E5462 slots below the 3.0 GHz, E5450.

Intel has one 1600 MHz dual-core Penryn based Xeon processor ready for launch – the E5272. The Xeon E5272 features a 3.4 GHz clock speed and is priced at $1,172. Intel has also pulled in the launch of all dual-core Xeon processors to Q4 2007, with the quad-core processors. The dual-core Xeon E5260 and E5205 will also launch in Q4, not the Q1 2008 date earlier roadmaps showed.

Intel 1600 MHz front-side bus Xeon processors will drop into the upcoming Seaburg chipset. Seaburg features support for dual PCIe 2.0 x16 slots and up to 128GB of memory.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By Snowy on 8/29/2007 7:02:57 PM , Rating: 2
You can look at this two ways:
A) Intel is trying to beat down on AMD in as many ways as possible. They're really trying to take over.
Or...
B) Intel is trying to sell as much processors as they can before AMD launches Barcelona, which Intel knows it will be better than their current offerings.

Either way, Intel wins. (At least, in the short term ;) )


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By MrDiSante on 8/29/2007 7:08:23 PM , Rating: 3
I sincerely hope for the sake of consumer's that it's B because if not, then we'll go right back to the PIII and before days. And everyone knows where that leads. Yeah, that's right the PIV days. Point being: competition good, lack thereof bad. It might actually be advantageous in the long run for Intel to slow down a bit so AMD can recover from all the crap that's been hitting it.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By Accord99 on 8/29/2007 7:36:21 PM , Rating: 2
The days of the P3 and before are pretty much the exact same as today, you have some expensive flagship CPUs, some mid-level CPUs and some dirt-cheap low end CPUs that usually overclocked very well.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By StevoLincolnite on 8/29/2007 11:51:16 PM , Rating: 2
Its no where near the same, the Athlon and the Pentium 3 were incredibly competitive, and as AMD and Intel got closer to the 1ghz mark that competitiveness grew, As of late its been pretty one sided.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By mindless1 on 8/30/2007 2:51:55 AM , Rating: 4
No, it's been quite competitive. The winner is not the one who has the faster part at any given moment, it's the one who has the offering most of the market wants. That's the sub-$200 processor market, and in that Intel only has a select few processors worth having, with practically no performance advantage until they're overclocked. Overclocking, they are clear victors, but the average consumer isn't going to take advantage of that difference.

Also, the Athlon and P3 weren't all that competitive, recall that Intel tried to push their coppermine process to 1.13GHz which was later proven instable, just to attempt to keep up. Recall also they then tried to counter with the P4 which in early models had such poor performance that there was a class action lawsuit about it.

What I just wrote could be misconstrued, P3 was a fine processor for it's time and I'd have rather had one than an Athlon in the <=1GHz speeds. There was a difference though in that Intel was wearing the other shoe, they were the ones trying to keep up at that point, stretching their current product until they could get the next gen out the door. Today, that's what AMD is doing.

We keep trying to think in terms of company X vs Y, but it's really just a timetable upon which their own development dictates the future except for the pricing. Once we consider the pricing, we're back to my original comment that most people are looking for low cost systems, in which a post $150 CPU is a luxury for email, web surfing, office, etc.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By Spoelie on 8/30/2007 5:22:16 AM , Rating: 2
I'd rather have a thunderbird tho at those speeds, their fpu speed was phenomenal.. You're right that pre-thunderbird vs coppermine, the P3 was the better processor tho.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By MrBungle123 on 8/29/2007 7:37:11 PM , Rating: 3
option C) Intel has been inovating and increasing the speed of their processors roughly equavalent with "moores law" showing massive improvements over what was available at the same time last year while AMD has yet to pull their thumb out of their ass and do anything that amounts to any sort of real performace gain.

Intel last year: 1st gen Core 2 Duo's
Intel this year: quad cores at same to slightly faster clock speed of 1st gen Core 2 Duo's

AMD last year: FX62 2.8GHz Dual Core
AMD this year: 3.0 GHz Dual Core (haven't seen the X2 6400+ yet)

hmmm... could AMD's problem be that all they have done in a year is add a measly 200MHz to their product offerings? (re-badged stepping revisions aside) yeah I think so.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By TomZ on 8/29/2007 7:43:57 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, and I would add that (B) makes no sense anyway. There is no way that Intel could flood the market with so many processors that they could effectively reduce or eliminate demand for a higher-performing AMD processor, should one materialize. It's just not possible.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By MonkeyPaw on 8/29/2007 8:42:29 PM , Rating: 3
Wow, and if you do the same thing 2 years ago, you'll see that the best Intel could do was slap together the space heater known as "Pentium D." Do you honestly think that the high-performance semiconductor industry is easy, or that AMD was doing nothing for the last 2 years? Barcelona is called K10 because "K9" was partially developed and then scrapped. However, K10 has been in the works for a long time (such things take over a year to produce). AMD and Intel both invest billions into this industry; they don't just sit there and do nothing, even when times are good. It's laughable that because AMD isn't competitive that people think they aren't trying--like fully-functional, dime-sized, 460 million transistor CPUs just fall out of the sky.

Intel has about 75% of the market, and even they don't "get it right" all the time. As for their ability to follow moore's law? They have lots of fab space, and most of those transistors are cache. AMD could follow "moore's law" and ship K8s and K10s with 16mb of cache, but how would that help? Instead they created a more space efficient, low-latency IMC. Rumor has it that K10's IMC2 can read/write/copy to 1066-DDR2 at just over 11GB/sec--something Intel can't do yet even with its newest chipset running DDR3 (link below). But don't misunderstand me, it's not about who makes the lowest/highest transistor CPU, but transistor count and "moore's law" don't mean much regarding performance. If you need an example, K8 X2s have fewer transistors than Pentium D, and we know how that turned out. Think IPC, think efficiency. Intel's large L2 + high-bandwidth design is nicely offset by AMD's IMC + low latency approach. AMD's solution seems to make due with less die space and works best with mainstream memory (now DDR2-800). Intel just has to shrink dies faster to be price-competitive.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=41970

A 3.0ghz K10 with 2 OCed 2900XTs scored just over 30,000 in 3Dmark06. The delays have hurt AMD, that's no lie, but it looks like they have a winner when they finally get it out.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By Glaedrin on 8/29/2007 9:19:00 PM , Rating: 2
I totally agree, I read that earlier today and it seems that AMD's diligence will pay off.

If you remember, their CPU's have been faster clock for clock since K7, and what MonkeyPaw didn't post was that along with the 30,000 3Dmark06 score, the new chips are getting much more memory bandwidth then Intel with DDR3 (something like 7.5 GB/s on Intel and nearly 10 GB/s on AMD) this is because of their advanced on-chip memory controller.

On a side note...
I'm not bashing AMD, but they should have made high end 65nm server chips that would have trickled down to the enthusiast market. That cost them millions in manufacturing costs because they were banking on Barcelona being out H1.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By HopJokey on 8/29/2007 9:48:32 PM , Rating: 2
That story by the Inquirer has been of great debate on various tech forums the last two days. If you know how 3dMark06 gets it's score a 30,000 mark means that the Barcelona chip would be 50% faster than a 5 Ghz Kentsfield. It is highly improbable this is the case. More likely is that the author saw the score without knowing exactly the parameters of the set up. A forum member on XS emailed the author and asked him whether or not the setup was using "trip-fire" (3 2900XT cards). And the author replied that he did not know if that was the case or not. This explanation to the score he saw is more plausible.

What I am trying to say is that do not be so quick to conclude how well Barcelona will perform based on this story. We shall hopefully know the truth in a couple of weeks.

My prediction (based on the arch. overviews) is that overall Barcelona will be equal to Penryn clock for clock over a wide range of real world applications (Not 3dmark, or Everest memory, etc.). At best 10% faster. The only problem is, is that these parts will not clock very high initially. It will be up to AMD to ramp up the clocks to remain competitive.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By onelittleindian on 8/29/2007 10:05:50 PM , Rating: 5
I'll believe the Weekly World News before a story I read in the Inquirer.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By MaK2000 on 8/30/2007 1:16:33 AM , Rating: 2
AMD most years spends less than 1 bill actually. Intel spends almost 5. We will see what happens. Would be bad if AMD drops the bomb like the ATI side did. Even if AMD does win the performance than maybe Intel will win the price point though. They have the market share to still make more money than AMD in this manner and it would be an interesting twist in the story.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By Acanthus on 8/29/2007 9:53:14 PM , Rating: 2
Except the CPU score is higher than you can possibly get in 3dmark.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By MaK2000 on 8/30/2007 1:21:51 AM , Rating: 2
From who? TI? They serve nothing but BS to anyone who will listen with nothing to back it up. ATI has obviously optimized the drivers for 3DM06 since they are #1 right now and in any real world marks they get crushed and they don't OC near as well as the NV cards are so it is all drivers. The TI story means nothing just as everything from that POS site does. May I "inquire" their backing for the leak from Intel they had a couple years ago about that Nehalem, the Octal-core 16 thread CPU Intel is realeasing next year, was supposed to be clocked at 10+Ghz? We all now know that is BS and give 30 days time from any story they release and it is debunked by someone from the company itself or another reputable site. DONE


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By imperator3733 on 8/30/2007 10:04:56 AM , Rating: 2
You are mixing up the two different Nehalems. The original Nehalem was a version of NetBurst and would run at 10+ GHz. It was supposed to be released in 2005 or 2006. It was canceled when Intel canceled Tejas. The new Nehalem, to be released next year, is an improved version of Core, and will be quad-core. The two Nehalems have nothing to do with each other. They have the same names and are both Intel processors, but they are completely different designs.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By slickr on 8/29/2007 10:08:11 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure AMD has a winner in their hands! We all know theinquirer is a bunch of crap. they post dozens of articles and each one containing different details about the same processor for example every time. And even a total noob is likly to gues 1 out of 20 articles on the same product! So what i'm trying to say is that that 30.000 3D mark should not be taken seriosly. I mean come on the article is totally 10 years old boy wrote it. Fucking childish idiots are writing in the inquirer!
Not to mention that 3D mark depends mostly on graphic card and processor has only 1-10% influence in score


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By sprockkets on 8/29/2007 10:19:56 PM , Rating: 2
The INQuirer's goal is to just spit out whatever rumors it hears; that's the way they make their dime. Saying otherwise is like watching the daily show/colbert report and quoting it as a source. You are supposed to know it is a satire/fake news show. Although at times they are the only ones who seem to have enough balls to call out the Bush administration, but again, they do it for laughs, not because they are the watchdog.

I doubt they got 30k in 3dmark though.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By Glaedrin on 8/29/2007 10:43:45 PM , Rating: 1
I didn't exactly lean on the 30,000 score, but the memory bandwidth did seem accurate, considering that Intel's Quad-core CPU is not only limited by a memory controller that's not on the chip, but also that for cores 0 and 1 to communicate with 2 and 3, they must use the FSB.

Barcelona is a true Quad-core design that doesn't need to communicate through the FSB, and the L3 cache, coupled with Hyper transport, that should give it the aforementioned 10% lead on Penryn when clocks are ramped.

I would really like to know how the new Dual-core CPU's would do, considering that not everyone is going to have the cash for Quad.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By mrdelldude on 8/29/2007 10:35:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A 3.0ghz K10 with 2 OCed 2900XTs scored just over 30,000 in 3Dmark06. The delays have hurt AMD, that's no lie, but it looks like they have a winner when they finally get it out.


How long do you think it will take them to release in quantity, not just a paper launch, a Barcelona at that speed?

They are months late and are only releasing at speeds up to 2GHz.

There's no doubt that AMD has some great minds working for them and they put out good chips. But it's only a couple of weeks away from launch, how many engineering samples have been tested and benchmarked in the wild?

Intel has let some Penryns out for quick and dirty benchmarking, and they are launching months after Barcelona. Not only that, a dual has been OCed from 2.3 to 3.2 with not much effort.

These are interesting times for CPUs. It's certainly exciting. I can't wait until Nahelem, at that time Barcelona will be considerably more mature.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By Brockway on 8/30/2007 1:46:17 AM , Rating: 1
Its allegedly a 2.5ghz Agena K10 overclocked to 3ghz, not Barcelona. Why can't you seem to tell the difference? Barcelona ships at somewhere around 2ghz, Agena at 2.6ghz give or take a point.

Those numbers seem pretty dubious though. How the heck can a .5ghz overclock net 5,000 3dmarks?


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By Blaidd on 8/29/2007 11:41:55 PM , Rating: 2
you are using a link to that trash new site. LOL. I will only believe what i see from several independent sites on the upcoming performance of the k10 before i will pass judgment. until then its all speculation as to how it will perform in the real world. would hope it was good but suspect it will be a flop like the 2900xt.


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By crystal clear on 8/30/2007 3:07:27 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Rumor has it that K10's IMC2 can read/write/copy to 1066-DDR2 at just over 11GB/sec--something Intel can't do yet even with its newest chipset running DDR3 (link below)


How can you believe RUMOURS ? & how can you expect us to believe this ?

What sort of link you provide to support your claims ?

A FUN & Rumour Site ?-Here is an example how they spread around a lot of thrash.

AMD's Henri Richard rumored to be joining Apple !


http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=41...

Now compare this with-

After 20 years in the PC industry – and five of the most professionally rewarding years here at AMD – I have decided to make a move to a different business segment,” Mr. Richard said.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoo...

I gave you enough of evidence to prove/support my opinions

about the INQ.....!


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By LittleMic on 8/30/2007 6:21:07 AM , Rating: 2
quote:

Wow, and if you do the same thing 2 years ago, you'll see that the best Intel could do was slap together the space heater known as "Pentium D." Do you honestly think that the high-performance semiconductor industry is easy, or that AMD was doing nothing for the last 2 years?

Well, that's pretty convenient to forget Pentium M and Yonah.

Considering the sales of P4 at that time, I sure would not have wasted all the marketing done for the Pentium 4 brand to replace it with Core1 so soon.

How about waiting for P4 to die naturally and market Core2 ?


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By maroon1 on 8/30/2007 7:29:08 AM , Rating: 2
The Inquirer is not a reliable source

The author of the thread claimed that his laptop was stolen. LOL!!


RE: Intel Intel Intel...
By maroon1 on 8/30/2007 7:34:18 AM , Rating: 2
I meant that the author claimed that his laptop was stolen in his article

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=41970

quote:
The pics are gone with my stolen laptop, though.


"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis

Related Articles
Intel Sets "Penryn" Launch Date
August 14, 2007, 6:18 PM
Intel Prices "Penryn" Xeons
July 17, 2007, 4:06 PM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki