Is the P4 as big a blunder for Intel as IBM's MS DOS miscalculation?

[Hulk]

Has Intel overestimated the importance of clockspeed in the same way that IBM underestimated the importance of software?

When the P4 was in the planning stages it didn't sound like a good idea to me. Trading ultimate clockspeed for less work accomplished per clock. I thought then, and even more now, that winning the clockspeed race at all costs was not a good business move. I can understand why Intel did it, they were beat to 1GHz by AMD, and no matter what you hear, it hurt them. I believe the powers at be at Intel made the decision that they must always have the fastest chip. If you remember, they used to proudly state that fact whenever AMD got close.

So, they decide to "win" the clockspeed race with the P4 design. The problem is, was, and probably will always be, that NO ONE can decide to change the software. I would have thought that Intel would have learned this with the Pentium Pro debacle. They believed Windows 95 would be fully 32 bit AND released on time. Wrong on both counts. They quickly scrambled to revise the Pentium Pro core into the Pentium II. Say what you want about the p6 core, but it did age well. Not only did it get faster per clock cycle as it moved from PII to PIII Katmai, to PIII Coppermine, but overall clockspeeds increased from 200MHz, to 600MHz, to 1000MHz. Not a bad run.

Now we have the P4 which is SLOWER per clock than the PIII (not to mention the Athlon, which is faster than both). I hear a lot about all this video editing speed, but have yet to see it materialize. In fact, I have a small website for the explicit purpose of testing video editing speed using Ulead's MediaStudio Pro 6.0 video editing software. There is one P4 1.5GHz score and it is AS FAST (or slow) AS A PIII 750!!!

I am no Intel basher. Every system I've ever owned has been Intel for various reasons I don't want to get into in this thread. But my question is this; Is the P4 a fatal mistake for Intel? Or perhaps, the first in a series of bad decisions. With the recent demise of OMC (Outboard Marine Corporation) I'm starting to think that even a giant like Intel can faulter.

Intel IS scrambling. Note the rushed release of P4 1.7GHz at the lowest ever prices for the top of the line chip as well as price reductions across the entire chip line.

What do you think? Is Intel gaining ground, holding even, or sliding? Not just in terms of sales, but technology. Sales is today, but technology effects tomorrow's sales.

 

[erub]

i think your trying to incite yet another AMD vs. Intel flamewar.

 

[Alphacowboy]

Please make it stop!!!! It hurts, really it does!

 

[fkloster]

<< Is the P4 as big a blunder for Intel as...? >>



Blunder? Was the Pentium pro a blunder?



<< Now we have the P4 which is SLOWER per clock than the PIII... >>




..and NOW we have a motorola G4 733 that absolutely spanks ANY Intel or AMD part in clock for clock performance. So what?

 

[damocles]

I don't think it's a blunder at all.

99% of buyers only consider clockspeed when they purchase. This plus strong international marketing see intel controlling about 78% of the cpu market. To most people a P4 is faster than a P3, just because it is a P4- how many people would ever look at a few benchmarks (10%?).

Also with the move to a new socket and the potential for much larger clockspeeds and enhanced SSE2- the P4 has quite a good future. Especially if it can bring prices down by coupling with SDRAM.

Also the new Dual Xeons are looking set control that aspect of the market, at least until SMP AMD setups become established, which i personally don't think will happen soon.

You are righ though, giants can falter. Intel must be proactive in it's research and promotion.

 

[Hulk]

I'm trying to discuss Intel's P4 business plan.


I proposing the possibility that the P4 could be a blunder.

I never said the Pentium Pro was a blunder. Intel did &quot;back out of it&quot; pretty quickly with the Pentium II though...

 

[fkloster]

<< the P4 has quite a good future. Especially if it can bring prices down by coupling with SDRAM... >>



A P4, any P4, coupled with an SDRAM platform package would be a disaster for Intel. P4 parts need rambus' serial nature and high bandwidth to attain robust and dynamic performance results.



<< I proposing the possibility that the P4 could be a blunder... >>



No. You are asking how much of a blunder the P4 is, which is under an assumption that the P4 is ALREADY a blunder of some sorts. In fact, the P4 is not a blunder at all, therefor you should change your topic question.

 

[Duvie]

No I think this is a good topic of discussion....Zealots can see there way out!!!

I think as a marketing scheme the p4 is a success...The average person doesn't do a lot of research on these matters and Intel counts on that. It is a mhz hype game and trust me it works...I have tested it and people fall for it all the time...clock speed equates to performance therefore not only does intel have the fastest chip but the top three fastest chips...flokster this is sarcasm so don't get excited...


I think you are right about the blunder being INtel putting out a chip with all the claims but not delivering because it is dependent upon others to make it deliver...ie software engineers to optimise to sse or sse2 code. Once again from a consumer point of view they will never know it hasn't or isn't going to happen right a way...


I think intel has made calculated marketing moves, though many who can do the research know this is just another case of a high-tech company claiming more than it can deliver...then pawning it off as others problems or promising changes will happen. Ofcourse by then they will have new promises in a newer chip they want us to buy...The game of business!!! Played by all.

 

[Alphacowboy]

fkloster, Damn kid, that is a nice RIG! What do you think I could get my Athlon upto? I want to try O/C it. I had pretty good luck with my PIII 550E processor but kinda hesitant on O/C my 1.2GHz Athlon... Granted it has a 3 year waranty..

 

[gunf1ghter]

You don't see the similarities between the P4 and the Pentium Pro?

The Pentium Pro was released and clock for clock it was slower than the regular Pentium. Everyone said it was a blunder and that it was a big flop for Intel.

After about 12 months of maturing the Pentium Pro was the fastest thing you could buy, period.

The Pentium 4 will eventually be the top chip. There is something like 20 optimizations for the P4 that Intel hasn't even done yet. We will probably see those optimizations on cores coming out over the next 12 months. The chip also has a good lifecycle and will probably hit over 4 gig within the next 18 months.

How is that a flop?

btw, I am building an AMD rig so don't brand me an Intel Zealot.

 

[fkloster]

<< fkloster, Damn kid, that is a nice RIG! >>



Thanks (...oh ya, I'm 34 years old, but I still feel like a kid; sometimes anyways )



<< btw, I am building an AMD rig so don't brand me an Intel Zealot. >>



Damn, people are so scared of the mob around here... what a shame. If someone wants to call you a Zealot, so what?

 

[dowxp]

P4 has life. its just the beginning.

 

[Wingznut]

Oh man, you beat me to it gunfighter! :|

Add to that analogy, the Pentium. When it was first released, it was called a &quot;blunder&quot; because it didn't perform as well as the AMD 5x86. A little later, it became a huge success.


And actually, Hulk brings up many good points. I don't think his post was inciteful in the least.

 

[Wingznut]

Btw, not much happens &quot;really quickly&quot; in this industry. It takes years to develop new architectures.

 

[Alphacowboy]

fkloster... I am 23 and my girlfriend calls me kid too. Anyway, I get what ya mean about people worried about getting flamed, I have my opinions and my own likes and dislikes, Look at the systems I have, all Intel but my current system. About the only thing I am very partial to is Creative Labs, I have always had good luck so I stand behind it. People, post what ya like, just if you flame, have a good reason why, and personal experiance will be the only thing I listen too, the he said she said is fine but i don't buy it. What I talk about is from personal experiance and not some web sites bench marks... I go by what I see! Just my 2 cents!

 

[Noriaki]

I don't think it's a bludner at all.

Ever new architecture has it's bumps at first.

The Pentium 60 could barely take a 486DX2/66, much less the DX4/100.
But the P200MMX sure does...(same basic core)

The P-Pro couln't take a P5....but the Coppermine can.

The P4 can't beat a Coppermine now, but the coppermine is pretty well at the end of it's rope. They need a new architecture, and with time to stretch it's legs the P4 will become very powerful.

That's all been said by others, I just wanted to support that viewpoint.

One other thing to consider, the p6 core went from 150Mhz to 1Ghz, and still will be stretched further with the Tualatin (sp?).

The P4 starts at 1.3Ghz...how high will that stretch assuming equal life span? That's a fast CPU...


I think Intel has made on miscalculation, and that is the acceptance of Rambus. There is too much resistance against it, and at least for the moment they need it. Cheaper would be nice...since I just bought 512MB of PC2100 DDR for under $150 and it's dropped since I bought it...RDRAM has come down a lot but still looks pricey...

A P4 with SDRAM will SUCK! The P4 has 3.2GB/s of FSB bandwidth, and uses all of it

PC100 = 0.8GB/s, PC133 = 1.06GB/s..no where near what the P4 needs.

Right now Dual Channel PC800 is the only way to supply the P4 with the bandwidth it needs. Apperntly nVidia's Crush12 Athlon chipset implements Dual Channel DDR....if they did that for the P4 that could work to. Dual Channel PC1600 DDR would also be 3.2GB/s...but I think Dual channel DDR boards are going to be pricey...that's 128 data lines plus power and ground pins as opposed to 32 data pins in Dual Channel RDRAM...

The i845 is going to castrate the P4....it needs the Dual Channel Rambus...for now at least.

And with many of the biggest memory manufacturers against producing Rambus it's still kind of pricey.

You can call Rambus good or bad...I don't care...personally I see no point in singling out a memory type. You have to consider the CPU and chipset it runs on, DDR vs Rambus is pointless in my mind.
But the fact is if Micron and Infineon and the likes started to produce Rambus, then the cost would come down becuase their would be volume (supply and demand principles).
The memory manufacturer resistance to Rambus is the only problem I see from Intel's end. I don't think the P4 is a disaster or a miscalculation.

 

[damocles]

fkloster

When i said that moving to SDram maybe a good move, i wasn't talking about performance- but rather for marketing purposes.
The average joe schmuck doesn't have any idea about the benefits on various types of ram. They have a set amount of $ and want the most Mhz for their buck

 

[fkloster]

Sadly, your prolly right...

 

[grant2]

<< I can understand why Intel did it, they were beat to 1GHz by AMD, and no matter what you hear, it hurt them. I believe the powers at be at Intel made the decision that they must always have the fastest chip.
So, they decide to &quot;win&quot; the clockspeed race with the P4 design. >>



P4 must have been been on the drawing boards for 3 years before AMD hit 1ghz.

 

[idgaf13]

P4 was a blunder on several counts.
It is dependent on RDRAM ,the choice of RAM was made without concern for the manufacturers
of memory. Intel even tried monetary offers to get it produced supposedly to finance new equipment to make RDRAM .Yields were poor and of low quality PC600 and PC700 .
RDRAM must be PC800 to be competitive with SDRAM.PC800 yields are low.

P4 requires SSE2 instructions to obtain reasonable benchmarks. Who is going to buy all new
programs just to be competitive ?

The P4 and Rambus may mature well but it does not have much time as Intel wants to ramp 64 bit cpu production and dump 32 bit asap.

The competition,Apple AMD IBM etal,have CPUs which use a memory type that is easily produced,
requires no special retooling of factories to make and performs better than the previous generation of memory.

The CPUs of the competition,Apple AMD IBM etal,are superior to the P4.
they will all mature the rate of that maturity will be interesting.

I see it as Intels game to lose as IBM did .
Intel aligned themselves with an Intellectual Property company and a proprietary tecnology,Rambus DRAM,and lost sight of reality.
Blame it on Andy Grove ,he bled Intel R+D dry leaving nothing for his sucessors.

 

[Wingznut]

LOL... Where do you get this stuff from?

 

[schwar]

im confused what is idgaf13 talking about? hehe

 

[Pabster]

Grant2 wrote:

&quot;P4 must have been been on the drawing boards for 3 years before AMD hit 1ghz.&quot;

Do you recall who introduced the very first 1GHz x86 processor? Hint: It wasn't Intel. They sure tried with the 1.13GHz Pentium III though.

P4 was on the drawing board for (quite) a while, it's too bad they didn't leave it there a couple more months and release it the way they had planned to. Instead, they rushed it off the drawing board and out to consumers castrated significantly from original specifications. Hopefully, Northwood will correct these &quot;blunders&quot; as everyone is calling them.

 

[Wingznut]

Again I ask... Where do you guys get this stuff?

 

[ToBeMe]

Wingnut...............They don't sleep worth a damned! They can't.....it's got to take all night to dream this stuff up! LOL!