Conroe debunked

[Emission]

^ Wow, care to fill me in on that cele? lol. Anywho, even though the Prescott has heat issues, it's a better performer than the Northwood. For those who could overcome the high heat output, it was an immense performer (Got mine to 3.72 with some cold air). I remember the first P4's to hit 5GHz on phase, I believe it was the P4 Prescott EE's. RDRAM is possibly the worst thing invented in terms of price/performance ratio. Its only a fraction faster than DDR in some cases, my point: It was avoided like the plague whenever possible.

I happen to *agree* with you that Intel is playing the Fab Advantage for all its worth (and that's quite a lot). Why do you think I called this tactic *swamping*? Core is shaping up to be a real monster, with all indicators showing that it has more legs than a millipede. Unlike AMD, Intel has enough sheer capacity to *drown* the market in processors without taking it in the neck And even though Intel is now supplier of choice to Apple, even Apple's demand is not enough to save AMD from a Core Onslaught, which appears to be *exactly* what Intel is planning. I would wager that someone from AMD Legal is running to the Justice Department, moaning, "Uncle, Uncle, come save my a**; the Big Bad Chipzilla is gonna *drown* me!"

I solely agree, and would wager on that too . Intels fab capacity drowns AMD, and in a situation like this where Intel holds better cards, it almost looks dangerous for AMD. Why do I think so? Well lets see, Intel can manufacture better chips, and still cash in on considerable profits without charging the consumer $1000 a chip. It's one of two things in AMD's case: (1) They have a bad hand of cards, where they have nothing to show and are holding back, or (2) They have something in store for Intel that could be competitive, but they want to keep it a secret. Even though, if you have something to show, why wouldnt you show it?

 

[Mav451]

Lol, I'm a AMD f_nboy, and even I knew about the 2.4C

Heck, if I hadn't bought the TBred 2100+ (which ran at 11 x 200Mhz) in early '03, I probably would have gone Intel instead. 2.4C were known for being 1GHz FSB monsters. I believe the combo was IC7-G + 2.4C and some PC4000 RAM for headroom.

Hell...i could have been in blue camp if the situation had been different. I wonder...

 

[Terra]

Like I said, the Pentium 2.4GHZ = Northwood A, there was no letter needed as it is the first procesor to reach 2.4GHZ hence it was jsut refered to as Pentium 4 2.4GHZ..

Same thing with the 2.2GHZ as there was never a willamette that made it to 2.2GHZ so the 2.2GHZ is Northwood only, and hence does not need the additonal letter.

Not true...
Have a look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4#Processor_Models

Public Designation: (original release revision)
Core (Intel Codename): Willamette

Public Designation: P4A
Core (Intel Codename): Northwood

Public Designation: P4B
Core (Intel Codename): Northwood

Public Designation: P4C
Core (Intel Codename): Northwood

Terra...

 

[Emission]

*Oops, Double post.

 

[Donnie27]

I am referring to Rambus' lawsuits against virtually the entirety of the JEDEC membership, claiming patent infringement (specifically, over DDR SDRAM). In addition to the memory manufacturers, both VIA and Intel were named as defendants. When that suit was tossed out, they tried to sue Micron, Infineon, and Intel (again); this time, claiming predatory pricing. (VIA was involved in a lawsuit of its own by Intel, over the Apollo Pro 133 and 133A chipsets, among others.)

RAMBUS sued over ITS IP=P RAMBUS OWNED the tech and the they WON the cases brought against the Big-7. Many companies didn't fight RAMBUS becuase knew RAMBUS owned it. Again, you're a victim of Micron and Infineon's misinformation machine.
AMD and Intel owned RAMBUS licenses long before any lawsuits were brought against the others. You think AMD and Intel are dumb? I don't Blame if someone were using my IP, I'd sue their asses too!

My beef with Rambus wasn't over their being lawsuit-happy; it was (as you pointed out) that the memory was Too Darn Expensive. That nasty problem led *directly* to my purchase of the Trinity 400 (and the VP6 that replaced it).

The market never accepted RDRAM so the prices didn't get lower like it should have> But please keep in mind that at times it was cheaper than PC-2100.

I'm not going to harp on the Hyperthreading thing since Coldpower and Chris already straighten that out.

 

[Terra]

RAMBUS sued over ITS IP=P RAMBUS OWNED the tech and the they WON the cases brought against the Big-7. Many companies didn't fight RAMBUS becuase knew RAMBUS owned it. Again, you're a victim of Micron and Infineon's misinformation machine.
AMD and Intel owned RAMBUS licenses long before any lawsuits were brought against the others. You think AMD and Intel are dumb? I don't Blame if someone were using my IP, I'd sue their asses too!



The market never accepted RDRAM so the prices didn't get lower like it should have> But please keep in mind that at times it was cheaper than PC-2100.

I'm not going to harp on the Hyperthreading thing since Coldpower and Chris already straighten that out.

Back when I got my P4A 2.4Ghz Northwood I had the choice between DDR-PC2100 @ 2.1GB/s or RDRAM PC800 @ 3.2Ghz...
I choose RDRAM...why cripple my CPU?

I like my RDRAM...it's "sleep mode"(low power consumption)...
But I could also se a lot of people fall for the Anti-RAMBUS FUD that was spread...
By the comapines that got convicted in court...

Terra - Infact I still use 4 x 256MB Samsung RDRAM PC-800

 

[Emission]

^ I know what you mean. When I had my Prescott, the PC2100 I used on it for a while was horrendous, it totally choked the system. When I slapped on some DDR400, it changed dramatically.

 

[Donnie27]

Back when I got my P4A 2.4Ghz Northwood I had the choice between DDR-PC2100 @ 2.1GB/s or RDRAM PC800 @ 3.2Ghz...
I choose RDRAM...why cripple my CPU?

I like my RDRAM...it's "sleep mode"(low power consumption)...
But I could also se a lot of people fall for the Anti-RAMBUS FUD that was spread...
By the comapines that got convicted in court...

Terra - Infact I still use 4 x 256MB Samsung RDRAM PC-800

I wouldn't and didn't cripple mine either. I needed 6.4GB of bandwidth and only got 3.2GB from PC-800 and a possible 4.2GB from PC-1066 . I only left RAMBUS when Canterwood i875 shipped.

My wife's PC has a 3.5 year old install of Win2K Pro. It can sleep for a week and wake up without a snag. It has 4 128MB Sticks of PC-800 but the Samsung 4.5ns version. These have no Speed drop with all 4 slots full glitches. Its a Gigabyte 8IHXP.

 

[sparks]

Emission the cele 300.
it was the same thing as the p2 450 but a lot less price.
so you get one and overclock to a 450-500.
it was 1999
I wish I could remember what the name of the water setup I had...
it was the one with the submersible pump that you got in a tupperware bowl.
ROFL
I bet a preshot would melt the solder on the block

man those celerons sold fast that was the last of those things....
intel quickly cut the cele to half the cache and then made strides to make sure that the
cele would NEVER again be a pentium, or anything else for that
matter...emachine maybe.

sparks

 

[Emission]

Those were the early days of the celerons and pentiums, where Intel learned their lesson about overclocking lol. Good while it lasted, bad for Intels economy though lol.

 

[Donnie27]

Those were the early days of the celerons and pentiums, where Intel learned their lesson about overclocking lol. Good while it lasted, bad for Intels economy though lol.

It's almost never been Intel vs. Overclocks like most of US. But shady VARs selling overclocked P3 350 as P450's and even 300A as a P3450 and even 500s. Not just processors but Video cards as well. Even when the first i875 and 865's shipped many RAM makers just rebadged their PC-2700 as PC-3200. Beside that, NorthwoodC and even the last Prescotts overclock well.

IMHO, I think Intel could care less about this small market of overclockers. Except they and AMD doing something silly like selling special versions that cost out the wa-zoo, hehehe.

 

[duby229]

I solely agree, and would wager on that too . Intels fab capacity drowns AMD, and in a situation like this where Intel holds better cards, it almost looks dangerous for AMD. Why do I think so? Well lets see, Intel can manufacture better chips, and still cash in on considerable profits without charging the consumer $1000 a chip. It's one of two things in AMD's case: (1) They have a bad hand of cards, where they have nothing to show and are holding back, or (2) They have something in store for Intel that could be competitive, but they want to keep it a secret. Even though, if you have something to show, why wouldnt you show it?

Intels FAB capacity is exactly what has been hurting it to an extent. They have WAY too much capacity for some things and not enough for others.

They are way overstocked on 90nm parts and still have huge stocks of 130nm parts. But yet they are still struggling on making chipsets and other core logic. They still have shit poor yeilds on 65nm. And it looks like the reason is gate leakage. Leaks have already said that the 45nm fabs that are being built will prolly net be able to address the gate leakage problem either.

So pretty much Intel has a ton of fab capacity to compensate for poor yeilds and it is costing them HUGE.

What is funny about this though is the fact that Intel can't do anything about it. They are already heavily invested in marketing campaigns that they can't pull out of without hurting partners. 8 Billion dollars last time I checked which leaves little for improving there fab processes.

Which means that Intel will continue to fall behind in FAB tech. It is kinda funny actually. The very thing that Intel fans brag about is the very same thing that has been hurting Intel the most over the past few years. And will continue to hurt them for the forseeable future, becouse they have no plans to fix it.

 

[Emission]

That's a damn shame considering Conroe will most likely be in high demand. Im forseeing limited numbers of these chips being sold to consumers, and it could hurt them. Maybe the fab situation will clear up little by little and it wont be so much of a problem after a few long months, hopefully.

 

[coldpower27]

Not true...
Have a look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4#Processor_Models

Public Designation: (original release revision)
Core (Intel Codename): Willamette

Public Designation: P4A
Core (Intel Codename): Northwood

Public Designation: P4B
Core (Intel Codename): Northwood

Public Designation: P4C
Core (Intel Codename): Northwood

Terra...

Wikipedia is useless as a place of true determination as anybody is able to modify it's contents...

But like I siad, since the Pentium 4 2.4GHZ and 2.2GHZ were releases as their first grades of the class, they don't need a letter as they only used one core and that was Northwood with 400FSB.

 

[coldpower27]

Intels FAB capacity is exactly what has been hurting it to an extent. They have WAY too much capacity for some things and not enough for others.

They are way overstocked on 90nm parts and still have huge stocks of 130nm parts. But yet they are still struggling on making chipsets and other core logic. They still have shit poor yeilds on 65nm. And it looks like the reason is gate leakage. Leaks have already said that the 45nm fabs that are being built will prolly net be able to address the gate leakage problem either.

So pretty much Intel has a ton of fab capacity to compensate for poor yeilds and it is costing them HUGE.

What is funny about this though is the fact that Intel can't do anything about it. They are already heavily invested in marketing campaigns that they can't pull out of without hurting partners. 8 Billion dollars last time I checked which leaves little for improving there fab processes.

Which means that Intel will continue to fall behind in FAB tech. It is kinda funny actually. The very thing that Intel fans brag about is the very same thing that has been hurting Intel the most over the past few years. And will continue to hurt them for the forseeable future, becouse they have no plans to fix it.

Got any information to or links to back this up? Because I don't see anything wrong with Intel's 65nm process, the NetBurst products produced on 65nm have been shown to run well with less energy dissappation. 65nm has been shown to be a great improvement in leakage over the 90nm process. Yonah has been shown to consume no more energy then Dothan did and it's a Dual Core product.

90nm stocks sohlud no longer be a problem as Intel shifts production on this process to Itanium 2's and Core logic instead of producing Pentium 4's and Pentium D's. Since those have gone over to the 65nm node.

Nice try there trying to spin Intel massive Fab capacity as a disadvantage there. Unless you got figures showing Intel currently has enormous stocks of 90nm and 130nm products. Poor yeilds ha, Intel is one of the leaders of fab technology, their yield are definitely in the world class range if they can supply the 80% marketshare.

 

[Warmonkey]

Got any information to or links to back this up? Because I don't see anything wrong with Intel's 65nm process, the NetBurst products produced on 65nm have been shown to run well with less energy dissappation. 65nm has been shown to be a great improvement in leakage over the 90nm process. Yonah has been shown to consume no more energy then Dothan did and it's a Dual Core product.

90nm stocks sohlud no longer be a problem as Intel shifts production on this process to Itanium 2's and Core logic instead of producing Pentium 4's and Pentium D's. Since those have gone over to the 65nm node.

Nice try there trying to spin Intel massive Fab capacity as a disadvantage there. Unless you got figures showing Intel currently has enormous stocks of 90nm and 130nm products. Poor yeilds ha, Intel is one of the leaders of fab technology, their yield are definitely in the world class range if they can supply the 80% marketshare.

I second this motion. Lets see some numbers.

 

[Donnie27]

Intels FAB capacity is exactly what has been hurting it to an extent. They have WAY too much capacity for some things and not enough for others.

They are way overstocked on 90nm parts and still have huge stocks of 130nm parts. But yet they are still struggling on making chipsets and other core logic. They still have shit poor yeilds on 65nm. And it looks like the reason is gate leakage. Leaks have already said that the 45nm fabs that are being built will prolly net be able to address the gate leakage problem either.

Intel isn't overstocked with 90nm and 130nm that's an old wise tale. Some of Intel Fabs, at least two will gear up 45nm as small amounts are already tapped out. 3 are doing 65nm and a 4th coming online soon. Hey, that's old news. Intel said it would keep stampping out Preslers and Cedar Mill while shipping Conroe as well. 40% by Q1-07.

So pretty much Intel has a ton of fab capacity to compensate for poor yeilds and it is costing them HUGE.

What is funny about this though is the fact that Intel can't do anything about it. They are already heavily invested in marketing campaigns that they can't pull out of without hurting partners. 8 Billion dollars last time I checked which leaves little for improving there fab processes.

Not even close, unlike AMD whos paying back the EU and the Germans, Intel owns its Fabs. Evenyone has stated Intel's Yields are on target and they could ship early if they wanted to.

Which means that Intel will continue to fall behind in FAB tech. It is kinda funny actually. The very thing that Intel fans brag about is the very same thing that has been hurting Intel the most over the past few years. And will continue to hurt them for the forseeable future, becouse they have no plans to fix it.

This sounds like the work of the AMDZone, Van Smith or that Shakiro dewd! Nothing could be farther from FACTS and whats true. Again, 90nm wasn't broke, Prescott was screwed up. Preslers and Cedar Mill have very high yields and Victor Wang's running his Conroe with just a Heat Sink, yes, Passive means the same for Conroe.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/chipsets/display/20060420155917.html

Intel Corp.’s upcoming chipset code-named Broadwater P may see the light of the day a bit earlier than expected and may also acquire capability of multi-GPU support, something, which was earlier available only with premium class chipsets from Intel.

A news-story published by Chinese-language HKEPC web-site states that Intel may formally unveil the Intel P965 as early as on the 7th of June, possibly at Computex Taipei 2006 trade-show and also equip its new performance-mainstream processor with ability to share the PCI Express x16 bus for graphics between two graphics cards, thus, providing support for multi-GPU technologies, such as ATI Technologies CrossFire.

I said it wasn't strange that AMD was launching stuff on 666. They've always given away some launch date Intel planned for one thing or another. Now it's clear LOL! If you want to know when Intel is about to launch something just look for AMD's planned dates, for anything newsworthy?

 

[visaris]

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060419/20060419005903.html?.v=1
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=AMD

Intel isn't overstocked with 90nm and 130nm that's an old wise tale.

Intel's Inventory went up from $3.12 billion to $3.55 billion during Q1, this is almost a full quarter of inventory. When you look at their Q2 outlook, they expect more of the same. The truth is that Intel's sales are down, and inventories are up.

Not even close, unlike AMD whos paying back the EU and the Germans, Intel owns its Fabs.

Intel's cash is at $7.8 billion, their debt is at $2.6 billion; the ratio is 1.83. AMD's cash is at $2.6 billion, their debt is at $0.6 billion; the ratio is 2.16 . Sounds to me like you are the one who is "not even close". The truth is that AMD has a better cash to debt ratio than intel.

This sounds like the work of the AMDZone, Van Smith or that Shakiro dewd!

Who cares who says it if it is true? Check the numbers yourself if you want to waste the time. I did just for the hell of it.


I'm not saying your whole post is wrong, but you certainly are in the instances above.

 

[Warmonkey]

SANTA CLARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 19, 2006--Intel Corporation:


Intel Corporation today announced first-quarter revenue of $8.9 billion, operating income of $1.7 billion, net income of $1.3 billion and earnings per share (EPS) of 23 cents. Excluding the effects of share-based compensation, the company posted operating income of $2.1 billion, net income of $1.6 billion and EPS of 27 cents.



"We believe PC growth rates have moderated over the course of the past few quarters, leading to slower chip-level inventory reductions at our customers and affecting our revenue in the first half of the year," said Intel President and CEO Paul Otellini. "We made excellent operational progress during the quarter, shipping millions of 65nm dual-core processors, and saw strong market acceptance of the Centrino(TM) Duo mobile platform as well as the Viiv(TM) platform for the digital home. We plan to launch new processors based on the Intel(R) Core(TM) microarchitecture in the third quarter, giving Intel performance leadership across the server, desktop and mobile segments and setting the stage for a strong second half."

 

[Aztlan]

Wow.. so many replies
lol

so probably somebody posted the benchmarks of Intel's top Core Duo mobile processor
Tech Report

if that little CPU can do that

those benchmarks about conroe a few months ago can hold true..

 

[PGHammer]

Got any information to or links to back this up? Because I don't see anything wrong with Intel's 65nm process, the NetBurst products produced on 65nm have been shown to run well with less energy dissappation. 65nm has been shown to be a great improvement in leakage over the 90nm process. Yonah has been shown to consume no more energy then Dothan did and it's a Dual Core product.

90nm stocks sohlud no longer be a problem as Intel shifts production on this process to Itanium 2's and Core logic instead of producing Pentium 4's and Pentium D's. Since those have gone over to the 65nm node.

Nice try there trying to spin Intel massive Fab capacity as a disadvantage there. Unless you got figures showing Intel currently has enormous stocks of 90nm and 130nm products. Poor yeilds ha, Intel is one of the leaders of fab technology, their yield are definitely in the world class range if they can supply the 80% marketshare.

Also, other than some RMA inventory in 90nm (which they *have* to have given that three year warranty that Intel has on their boxed processors) how much of the 90 nm fab run is dedicated to processors? Intel is aware of the chipset shortage; however, that shortage is of *one* chipset: the i865PE (Intel's *floor* chipset). Hate to remind you of this, but the 865PE is old; in fact, it dates back to the original Northwood (it started as a S478 chipset, folks)! Yes, Intel actually went to ATI for core-logic to ameliorate the shortage of that particular chipset; however, Intel has *no* extant shortages of any of the 9xx chipsets (the chipset logic of preference for both 9xx and Core); it also helped ATI (who Intel has a CLA with, by the by) establish a presence in the value/IGP marketplace (Intel itself has a butt-ugly reputation in this market). Yes; stocks of 90 nm are higher than is typical, but Otellini isn't even remotely worried about that (Bryant isn't either, and it was Bryant that was talking to the investment houses). What makes you think that stocks of 130 nm are taller than is typical? 130 nm never even got mentioned. Intel makes more money on 9xx chipsets than 8xx chipsets in any case; hence it is perfectly happy to cede that floor market to ATI (besides, it still collects royalty payments from ATI).

 

[sparks]

we should go post all this in the AMD section for the new AM2.

most of the AMD boys would say the same thing.

DUH shiney YHUYY

ok enought of that....after seeing the new motheboard plans maybe this new
hyped mb set will make the AM2 even better

sparks

 

[GilmourD]

we should go post all this in the AMD section for the new AM2.

most of the AMD boys would say the same thing.

DUH shiney YHUYY

ok enought of that....after seeing the new motheboard plans maybe this new
hyped mb set will make the AM2 even better

sparks

Most of the AMD boys have already posted in this thread, so we've seen it already. We're just smart enough to sneak in under your radar... or something along those lines.

Besides... Useless post... Most AMDers acknowledge that Intel's not garbage, just generally... pretentious and sometimes overpriced. Most of us have owned Intel, and if Intel put out a product that didn't make us yawn profusely, we might consider buying it. Hell, (cf)Eclipse is looking to buy an Intel rig, and he's probably the ambulatory (I'll explain this word if you don't get it), vocal Stephen Hawkings of the AMD world.

A smart computer geek keeps his options open. I personally just haven't seen anything that makes it worthwhile for me to switch sides.

 

[Donnie27]

Also, other than some RMA inventory in 90nm (which they *have* to have given that three year warranty that Intel has on their boxed processors) how much of the 90 nm fab run is dedicated to processors? Intel is aware of the chipset shortage; however, that shortage is of *one* chipset: the i865PE (Intel's *floor* chipset). Hate to remind you of this, but the 865PE is old; in fact, it dates back to the original Northwood (it started as a S478 chipset, folks)! Yes, Intel actually went to ATI for core-logic to ameliorate the shortage of that particular chipset; however, Intel has *no* extant shortages of any of the 9xx chipsets (the chipset logic of preference for both 9xx and Core); it also helped ATI (who Intel has a CLA with, by the by) establish a presence in the value/IGP marketplace (Intel itself has a butt-ugly reputation in this market). Yes; stocks of 90 nm are higher than is typical, but Otellini isn't even remotely worried about that (Bryant isn't either, and it was Bryant that was talking to the investment houses). What makes you think that stocks of 130 nm are taller than is typical? 130 nm never even got mentioned. Intel makes more money on 9xx chipsets than 8xx chipsets in any case; hence it is perfectly happy to cede that floor market to ATI (besides, it still collects royalty payments from ATI).

First of all, there *were shortages and Intel even put i865 back into production Nov-05 because it can support a very wide range of their processors. Most of these are meant for business platforms and budget systems. I865/Springdale does NOT go back to the original Northwood that shipped on i845, i850, then i850E. Sringdale and Canterwood didn't ship until Northwood C launched almost a 1.5 years later. If it wasn't a year and a half, hell, it seemed like it.

Only in this market segment does Intel have a "butt-ugly reputation". Sure we know most integrated graphics suck, folks buying 95% of these systems are not playing games though. Even rookie IT folks know how to order graphics correctly, most of the time.

 

[PGHammer]

First of all, there *were shortages and Intel even put i865 back into production Nov-05 because it can support a very wide range of their processors. Most of these are meant for business platforms and budget systems. I865/Springdale does NOT go back to the original Northwood that shipped on i845, i850, then i850E. Sringdale and Canterwood didn't ship until Northwood C launched almost a 1.5 years later. If it wasn't a year and a half, hell, it seemed like it.

Only in this market segment does Intel have a "butt-ugly reputation". Sure we know most integrated graphics suck, folks buying 95% of these systems are not playing games though. Even rookie IT folks know how to order graphics correctly, most of the time.

The 865PE (as you pointed out, originally codenamed "Springdale") goes back to S478 (which is just as bad), and was pretty much the *only* 800-series chipset to survive the S478/LGA775 transition (the 850, 850E, and even big-brother 875P "Canterwood" certainly didn't). Springdale/865PE was intended to be both a step down from Canterwood and the replacement for the 850 and 850E (unlike the 850, the 865PE supported DDR SDRAM, as did big-bro 875P).

Intel has a butt-ugly rep in this segment *because* integrated graphics suck, and worse, they didn't have to. Before producing the egglayers that were the 810, 815, 815E, and later 910 and 915, Intel actually *did* produce a decent performing (though not in the ATI or nVidia category) pair of graphics accelerators: the Intel 740 and follow-on 752. While this chipset was a jointly-designed product (Intel, Chips & Technologies and Bethesda, MD-based Lockheed Martin), Intel fabbed the actual chips itself and handled negotiations with any interested third parties. Diamond Multimedia added the i740 to its rather long product line (Stealth 740) and it also sold pretty well in the OEM and whitebox space. It wasn't ATI or nVidia, but it also wasn't S3 (the only company in the graphics game that had a worse reputation than pre-7xx Intel). Intel acquired complete rights to the chipset from both C&T and Lockheed Martin before the launch of the 810, and followed the 740 with the 752, which actually appeared in several slimline business-level desktops from the likes of Compaq and HP (which were still separate companies at the time) as onboard non-integrated graphics, replacing (you guessed it) S3.
Intel and S3 weren't the only players in the low-end onboard graphics space. Well before their foray into the IGP business, ATI started putting their Rage II chipsets onto (among other things) Compaq ProLiant server boards and Dell Dimension and OptiPlex workstation boards. (Onboard, but non-integrated. They certainly didn't suck.) And Intel dared to come out with the 810?

 

[Donnie27]

Intel's Inventory went up from $3.12 billion to $3.55 billion during Q1,

These aren't 130nm processors as the poster stated. And even your link shows Intel is shipping Millions of 65nm. This is a much larger Intel we're talking about, not a smaller AMD. Keep your numbers to scale?

this is almost a full quarter of inventory. When you look at their Q2 outlook, they expect more of the same. The truth is that Intel's sales are down, and inventories are up.

Not at all. Sales are ALWAYS down this time of year and of course Inventories are up (Intel's and its Customers). Hell, AMD's sales were Flat, big deal! Intel's main customers have large inventories and little reason to buy CURRENT AMD or Intel processors. Each will be looking for that Killer piece of Hadware to increase sales. Intel has one, AMD doesn't LOL!

The firm turned in a net profit of $1.35 billion on sales of $8.94 billion and a billion of anything is still a lot. But in the same financial period last year, it made net profit of $2.18 billion. And this time round,its gross margin was a piffling 55%. Intel prefers it to hover around the 60% mark.

GROSS MARGIN PERCENTAGE EXCLUDING
SHARE-BASED COMPENSATION(1) 56.1% 61.8% 59.3%

Hardly any pain there that can't be made up in the 3rd and 4th Quarters by the end of the Year. Last year folks weren't waiting On Conroe and about 4 price cuts=P Making that actually look good.

Intel's cash is at $7.8 billion, their debt is at $2.6 billion; the ratio is 1.83. AMD's cash is at $2.6 billion, their debt is at $0.6 billion; the ratio is 2.16 . Sounds to me like you are the one who is "not even close". The truth is that AMD has a better cash to debt ratio than intel.

One quarter doesn't make a whole year.

You might want to check what you trying to say here? Ratios as compared totals are misleading. AMD would kill to be in Intel's position. Some of that debt is buying back Intel stock that was at an all-time low. Do you have any idea how much profit the company will get back from that?

Who cares who says it if it is true? Check the numbers yourself if you want to waste the time. I did just for the hell of it.

I saw that as soon as it posted. You need to read the numbers again? So seem to be missing a lot of points.

I'm not saying your whole post is wrong, but you certainly are in the instances above.

Same for you.

A. Price Cuts on the 23rd as VARS and OEMs are already getting rebates, added sales.
B. More cuts on the 30th a sales jump, maybe small.
C. i965 launches on June 7th, new plaform, chipset sales increase.
D. Conroe by July, sales SPIKE for sure.
C. Another round of Price Cuts making 3.6GHz Dual Core cost $241, sales spike.

NONE of this was going on last year when Intel was cleaning AMD's Clock (some might say kicking their ass) and breaking records. 2005 was the year most who didn't get it then either, LOL, was an excellent year for Intel. It was better than the other excellent years for Intel.

Intel's 2nd Quarter might look worse than the first. The 3rd and 4th Quarters will make the Difference. Maybe my outlook is NOT SO BLEAK because I've seen these same patterns for 20 something years.

Last but not least, look for the bargain-basement sales from AMD by Sept or Oct 06. Many are going to feel jipped if they buy before then. Unless they're doing it out of love LOL!

 

[Donnie27]

The 865PE (as you pointed out, originally codenamed "Springdale") goes back to S478 (which is just as bad), and was pretty much the *only* 800-series chipset to survive the S478/LGA775 transition (the 850, 850E, and even big-brother 875P "Canterwood" certainly didn't). Springdale/865PE was intended to be both a step down from Canterwood and the replacement for the 850 and 850E (unlike the 850, the 865PE supported DDR SDRAM, as did big-bro 875P).

Of course it goes back to Sc-478 but almost all of the new ones are Sc-775, you do know that, right? i875 isn't needed since that chipset was the Performance Model that is easily out performed by newer models. Again, these are meant for Budget and are cheaper to build.

Intel has a butt-ugly rep in this segment *because* integrated graphics suck, and worse, they didn't have to. Before producing the egglayers that were the 810, 815, 815E, and later 910 and 915, Intel actually *did* produce a decent performing (though not in the ATI or nVidia category) pair of graphics accelerators: the Intel 740 and follow-on 752. While this chipset was a jointly-designed product (Intel, Chips & Technologies and Bethesda, MD-based Lockheed Martin), Intel fabbed the actual chips itself and handled negotiations with any interested third parties. Diamond Multimedia added the i740 to its rather long product line (Stealth 740) and it also sold pretty well in the OEM and whitebox space. It wasn't ATI or nVidia, but it also wasn't S3 (the only company in the graphics game that had a worse reputation than pre-7xx Intel). Intel acquired complete rights to the chipset from both C&T and Lockheed Martin before the launch of the 810, and followed the 740 with the 752, which actually appeared in several slimline business-level desktops from the likes of Compaq and HP (which were still separate companies at the time) as onboard non-integrated graphics, replacing (you guessed it) S3.

You're totally missing the point for IGP=P Since Intel sells these with their Chipsets, the out sale ATI and nVidia who also sell 'butt-ugley" IGP, hehehehe! Newer ones from them all will be nicer as a whole.

Intel and S3 weren't the only players in the low-end onboard graphics space. Well before their foray into the IGP business, ATI started putting their Rage II chipsets onto (among other things) Compaq ProLiant server boards and Dell Dimension and OptiPlex workstation boards. (Onboard, but non-integrated. They certainly didn't suck.) And Intel dared to come out with the 810?

So! Will you or I buy any of this crap?

 

[Donnie27]

A smart computer geek keeps his options open. I personally just haven't seen anything that makes it worthwhile for me to switch sides.

Of course you haven't. Even when you do see it after July, you'll still say the same thing

 

[duby229]

Intel gets there ass handed to them for the foreseeable future, but Donnie makes every excuse he can...

Then repeatedly says he isnt a !!!!!!.....

Fact is. Intel's second quarter sucked. AMD wiped the floor. Intel has nothing now that will make it better, but paper. When the third quarter comes, they may have a better chip, but they are going to so overstocked with current 90nm paryts that they arent going to be able to sell there good chip anyway. Not to mention that yeilds on 65nm suck. It's less then 50% right now. And predictions say that by the end of the year it wont be much better.

Why do you think Conroe hasn't been released yet. They've been ramping for the past three months. That should've been plenty of time to build stock.

 

[Poncho]

Intel gets there ass handed to them for the foreseeable future, but Donnie makes every excuse he can...

Then repeatedly says he isnt a !!!!!!.....

Fact is. Intel's second quarter sucked. AMD wiped the floor. Intel has nothing now that will make it better, but paper. When the third quarter comes, they may have a better chip, but they are going to so overstocked with current 90nm paryts that they arent going to be able to sell there good chip anyway. Not to mention that yeilds on 65nm suck. It's less then 50% right now. And predictions say that by the end of the year it wont be much better.

Why do you think Conroe hasn't been released yet. They've been ramping for the past three months. That should've been plenty of time to build stock.

LMAO... really, where do you come up with this? Did it ever occur to you that Intel might have realized a few years ago that to make a better chip they would have to lose a bit of market share? They knew that they could make a better processor, it would just take them a few years at which time they would lose market share. Then they figured out what they would lose based on AMD capabilities and decided it would be best to put everything on hold for NGMA. The only thing they didn't count on was AMD to get market share so late in the game.

And Conroe hasn't been released yet because there isn't a platform in production to run it on. 975, a "performance" board will not reach 90% of Intels market so they are waiting. As soon as 965 is ready, which is right in line with the roadmap, Conroe will be released.
They have the yields and the stock to do it.

 

[Poncho]

Fact is. Intel's second quarter sucked. AMD wiped the floor.

Oh... and I wonder if you asked AMD what they would rather have: Their "great" quarter or Intels "shitty" quarter what they would say? Provided you got an honest answer. LOL...

 

[coldpower27]

Intel gets there ass handed to them for the foreseeable future, but Donnie makes every excuse he can...

Then repeatedly says he isnt a !!!!!!.....

Fact is. Intel's second quarter sucked. AMD wiped the floor. Intel has nothing now that will make it better, but paper. When the third quarter comes, they may have a better chip, but they are going to so overstocked with current 90nm paryts that they arent going to be able to sell there good chip anyway. Not to mention that yeilds on 65nm suck. It's less then 50% right now. And predictions say that by the end of the year it wont be much better.

Why do you think Conroe hasn't been released yet. They've been ramping for the past three months. That should've been plenty of time to build stock.

And once again, no links or figures at all to where you acquired the information, where did you get the information that Intel has lower then 50% yield on 65nm products, considering that Intel never releases yield information concerning it's products as it's very sensitive information.

Once again there is not enough information on here to make any sort of determination to the magnitude you suggest. All we know that right now is Intel has 1.2 Billion worth of finished product inventory. What the split is between chipset and processor inventory, we do not know, how much of this is on 130nm/90nm/65nm fabrication we do not know.

90nm parts will continue to sell, as they are relegated to the lower mainstream sectors and value products. Intel is already taking action to ensure it moves 90nm inventory to make room for the new 65nm products through it's rebate programs. There are still many people that beleive GHZ is king, and this should ensure the movement of the remainder of 90nm inventory.

Intel's first quarter isn't the best, but it has had worser times. This is only the beginning of the year where sales are generally lower, there is still plenty of time to rebound.

 

[Poncho]

All we know that right now is Intel has 1.2 Billion worth of finished product inventory. What the split is between chipset and processor inventory, we do not know, how much of this is on 130nm/90nm/65nm fabrication we do not know.

Also people seem to forget that Intel makes other products as well. The fabs don't only turn out Chipsets and processors.

 

[coldpower27]

Also people seem to forget that Intel makes other products as well. The fabs don't only turn out Chipsets and processors.

That is true, the 1.2 Billion worth of product has the possibility of coming from alternate sources as well, NIC I believe and flash are 2 examples of other products Intel produces as well if I am not mistaken.

Note, though I wasn't trying with my statement implying that Intel ONLY makes chipsets and processors.

 

[PGHammer]

Of course it goes back to Sc-478 but almost all of the new ones are Sc-775, you do know that, right? i875 isn't needed since that chipset was the Performance Model that is easily out performed by newer models. Again, these are meant for Budget and are cheaper to build.


You're totally missing the point for IGP=P Since Intel sells these with their Chipsets, the out sale ATI and nVidia who also sell 'butt-ugley" IGP, hehehehe! Newer ones from them all will be nicer as a whole.



So! Will you or I buy any of this crap?

As I said, the Rage II *at that time* wasn't aimed at the mainstream. It *was* a mainstream graphics chipset two years earlier (1998), because I remember selling quite a few whitebox Rage II-based cards to S3 owners that wanted to upgrade (I was working at a computer store at that time, and, in fact, marshaled our getting these whitebox Rage IIs *because* of the S3 crap that was out there). Remember, this was 2000, and the ProLiant was a *server*, not a desktop; yet the Rage II was, in fact, standard fare in the ProLiant. (Onboard; yes. Integrated; no.) Intel's margin on performance chipsets is *higher* than on those *butt-ugly* IGP egg-layers, and, quite honestly, I would rather not see another S3 in my lifetime.

 

[$BangforThe$]

Debunk this!

http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/news.php?tid=587650

 

[Emission]

OMG! *Senses a virtualslap to duby*. 16 seconds Super Pi on its lowest model! OMG! *orgasm*...

 

[duby229]

On a hand picked chip that came from a wafer where half didnt work...... That wont be available until at least august, and even then wont be available in volume becouse the OEM's will be eatin them up.

I can't wait until November when it is actually available in retail.

 

[duby229]

They dont mention what board they used or anything.

From what I can tell the binary came from Intel. Good luck duplicating those results in november. As a matter of fact good luck duplicating those clocks in November. And actually since we are on the topic. What ever happened to 3.33 ghz? I thought that was going to be top of the line? Where are those at. If Intel wanted to spred FUD, why dont they pop out with there top chhip? I'll tell you, becouse they can't make it work in volume. The fastest chip they will be able to mass produce is going to 2.4ghz. Any thing they release higher will be hand picked and will be paper.

Besides earlier on in this thread I've already pointed out several occasions where that site was flat out wrong. With links to other sites that proved it.

That site is Intel's china bitch. If Intel wants to spred its FUD in the china market, then that is the site they count on to do it. It is the same way they use THG here.

 

[Donnie27]

On a hand picked chip that came from a wafer where half didnt work...... That wont be available until at least august, and even then wont be available in volume becouse the OEM's will be eatin them up.

I can't wait until November when it is actually available in retail.

Not that I know differently, but how do you know Half didn't work? Even if it's Sept, then what? There will be no supply problems, in fact, Intel's comments seemed more towards worrying about Chipsets. In a break from the Old Intel, it seemed they went overboard to make sure ATI, SIS and even VIA had the correct stuff to support them.

November?