Intel trips... falls flat on face!

stormbind

stormbind

Retenta personam!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,081
Location
London
INTEL have cancelled their Pentium 4 4GHz processor.

Is this due to manufacturing difficulties, or are users no longer interested in upgrading?

AMD have responded by delivering a painful blow in the form of a new varient of Athlon64 offering a dual-core and it's own northbridge for minimal read/write latency or faster cache searches.

Gradually, we are moving towards the PC on a chip, as invisaged by Cyrix back in the mid 90s.
 
4 Ghz?!?!?

Thats more then double my poor little 1.7Ghz . . . blasted technology, you can never keep up . . . *mumbles*
 
It's not all about clock cycles, but AMD are famous for getting more instructions per clock cycle. I have a couple of AMD 1.9 GHz athlons that I would swear are comparable to Intel P4 2.4 GHz processors. ... and that 64 bit processor is going to do floating-point and long integers like nobody's business. ... and linux will love it. I'll have to wait until the price comes down, though (sigh).
 
I don't mean to be a stick in the mud, but this news is about 2 months old....


Intel CEO C. Barret claims to have gotten it together, allthough he has recently attempted to do so by sending company wide emails, so I am not so sure I can believe him.

However, I am starting to think, now that I just sold AMD, INTC may be a good investment, because they are still a juggernaut, and have a PE ratio of 20:1, as AMD's is around 50:1.
 
IbnSina said:
It's not all about clock cycles, but AMD are famous for getting more instructions per clock cycle. I have a couple of AMD 1.9 GHz athlons that I would swear are comparable to Intel P4 2.4 GHz processors. ... and that 64 bit processor is going to do floating-point and long integers like nobody's business. ... and linux will love it. I'll have to wait until the price comes down, though (sigh).
Click to expand...

RISC CPUs ( Sun SPARC, intel itanium , motorola G series) probably do much more work per cycle, but their top frequencies are quite low. Same with AMD - they won't reach 3GHz anytime soon.

It is always trade off situation.
 
Neomega said:
I don't mean to be a stick in the mud, but this news is about 2 months old....
Click to expand...
These new AMD chips (codename: Egypt) won't ship until the 2nd half of 2005.
 
Neomega said:
I don't mean to be a stick in the mud, but this news is about 2 months old....
Click to expand...
Not being a stick in the mud - you are actually bringing up a very good point - I was going to say the same thing actually ;)

stormbind, as much as I love your thread titles, this one doesn't quite do Intel justice :) As a few others have mentioned, true processing power doesn't necessarily equate to clock cycles, and that is definitely the case here. As I, and a few others, have mentioned in a few other threads, Centrino technology is coming to desktops, and they are part of the future aim of chips. Not to mention that both Intel and AMD are working on dual core processor chips among other things.

For investors who feel weary, Intel still dominates the market and will continue to do so. I don't deny AMD's power or presence - it just isn't large enough to bring Intel down anytime soon - not to mention that they aren't diversified enough. Intel has stakes in technology other than processors, and they continue to raise the bar on those technologies and processor technology. (Not to mention that they signed a sweet deal with nVidia recently.)

Yes, they have run into a few stumbling blocks, but they have not tripped my friend :)
 
Intel got a bloody nose from AMD twice and 'stumbled' countless times with their stone-age concepts about processors. But they always came back up and will continue to annoy us because of their buddies from the old days with whom they have cpu supply deals and who will go on selling their cpus (often even exclusively) no matter how crappy they are (*cough* Dell *cough*).

And the fact that everyone seems to admire the Centrino concept is understandable, because it's just the imitation of what AMD did some 2 years ago when they introduced the Athlon XP :lol:
 
DaEezT said:
And the fact that everyone seems to admire the Centrino concept is understandable, because it's just the imitation of what AMD did some 2 years ago when they introduced the Athlon XP :lol:
Click to expand...

At that time, Athlon was burning hot.
Pentium M, on other hand - uses up to 35W power.
 
For investors who feel weary, Intel still dominates the market and will continue to do so. I don't deny AMD's power or presence - it just isn't large enough to bring Intel down anytime soon - not to mention that they aren't diversified enough
Click to expand...

Sony IBM and Toshiba are coming into the market, and have bought technology from Saifun... the chip is going to be called Cell.

My gut intuition tells me that cell will cut into AMD's market share more harshly, since Intel has a much stronger grip on the technophobic. AMD has done a good job of carving out a niche in the technologically open minded, (not saying people who use Intel aren't) , but Cell most certainly will not be able to eat any of Intel's share, if it is successful, ti will have to be at AMD's expense.
 
Mikoyan said:
The processing power of two cores in one CPU. It's like two CPU's in one.
Click to expand...
Ok. Yeah. Wow.
confused53.gif
 
Mikoyan said:
It's not all about the GHz you know.
Click to expand...

No, its not, I agree, but i am just amazed how much technology improved in 2 years. 2 Years ago, my little 1.7Ghz was pretty good, now they have all these ultra-new, powerful, double core 4 Ghz processors.

Time for an upgrade, me thinks.
 
Jeratain said:
Not being a stick in the mud - you are actually bringing up a very good point - I was going to say the same thing actually ;)
Click to expand...
I'm not sure. The dual-core processors were known a while back, but they didn't have the new northbridge core-logic built in.

I'm still finding these stories in reputable cutting-edge (December) magazines.
Jeratain said:
stormbind, as much as I love your thread titles, this one doesn't quite do Intel justice :) As a few others have mentioned, true processing power doesn't necessarily equate to clock cycles, and that is definitely the case here.
Click to expand...
What ever gave you the impression that I don't know this? :confused:

Way back when the P2 was out, I was arguing that the industry had gone the wrong way and that a quad-core 25MHz processor would be faster than then new 233MHz chips.
 
Mikoyan said:
The processing power of two cores in one CPU. It's like two CPU's in one.
Click to expand...
AMD has their plans, as does Intel. I believe Intel plans on introducing dual core processors that include HT. So basically, you'll have two cores - each running two threads - making that a total of 4 threads for one processor. And apparently they have some sweet plans for their server chips in the same regards.
 
RealGoober said:
No, its not, I agree, but i am just amazed how much technology improved in 2 years. 2 Years ago, my little 1.7Ghz was pretty good, now they have all these ultra-new, powerful, double core 4 Ghz processors.

Time for an upgrade, me thinks.
Click to expand...

Actually the fastest CPU speed in terms of Ghz is 3.8.
 
Jeratain said:
AMD has their plans, as does Intel. I believe Intel plans on introducing dual core processors that include HT. So basically, you'll have two cores - each running two threads - making that a total of 4 threads for one processor. And apparently they have some sweet plans for their server chips in the same regards.
Click to expand...
Intel will again skimp on cache though. AMD has given an nice big cache to each core, whereas Intel will be sharing one smaller cache among cores.

Intel will probably, as ussual, emphasise raw GHz.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MarineCorps
Intel ready to ship dual-core processors
Replies
0
Views
1K
MarineCorps
MarineCorps
MarineCorps
AMD Details Early Quad-Core Plans
Replies
4
Views
1K
warmwaffles
W
Back
Top Bottom