OMG Intel 45nm........

[PCTC2]

no, they should still be released in January. only Yorkfields are affected.

 

[Soubriquet]

Originally posted by: BonzaiDuck
Since we're all speculating . . .

Now I find that boards with P35 chipsets have problems with Yorkfield quads. And I still wonder, given Intel's spat with nVidia, that they somehow made a hardware differentiation in Yorkfield to thwart nVidia, or they just went to market too fast with the QX9650.

well well, I would guess that since nVidia played so careless over cooperating about SLI that Intel decided not to bother about nVidia compatibility. I shouldnt think they went out of their way, they are not like that but if its true then nVidia got what they deserved for being so shortsighted and self centered, the medical term for that kind of behaviour in an individual is autism. (I mean no disrespect to diagnosed autistics by the way. Its just that this term, according to its definition, does reflect the way nVidia behave.)

I am glad to see them getting a taste of their own medicine, not because I wish ill on nVidia but because they need to learn because that is also the way nVidia treat their customers (drivers & SLI etc) and it just wont do, so they need to learn their lesson about why human beings need to cooperate and for their sake as well as anyone else's, the sooner the better.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: j0j081
sup Edz.

Not sure if it is Edz agaib but you know it is actually fitting the MO though in the sense that a newlly joined (minimal post-counts) OP starts a thread with a few words and then never returns to engage in any dialogue during the rest of the thread.

 

[badnewcastle]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: j0j081
sup Edz.

Not sure if it is Edz agaib but you know it is actually fitting the MO though in the sense that a newlly joined (minimal post-counts) OP starts a thread with a few words and then never returns to engage in any dialogue during the rest of the thread.

It's Edz...

 

[jhtrico1850]

According to Xbit, Intel will downgrade the Quads to 1066 FSB to accomodate, right? hoorah

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: jhtrico1850
According to Xbit, Intel will downgrade the Quads to 1066 FSB to accomodate, right? hoorah

i wish we could have another mhz reset... [New arch]

numbers are already back where they were back in the old hyper transport days again.


pretty sure at this rate, we'll see 5 digit overclocks soon. As in 3-4 yrs... not soon as in tomorrow soon.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: jhtrico1850
According to Xbit, Intel will downgrade the Quads to 1066 FSB to accomodate, right? hoorah

i wish we could have another mhz reset... [New arch]

numbers are already back where they were back in the old hyper transport days again.


pretty sure at this rate, we'll see 5 digit overclocks soon. As in 3-4 yrs... not soon as in tomorrow soon.

Will Nehalem provide opportunity for such a "mhz reset"?

 

[nyker96]

Originally posted by: JumpingJack

Originally posted by: nyker96
really don't care why they doing this, as long as at the end of the day the cpu works with the new P35-E I bought that's all.

Read the article again, Intel is 'supposedly' delaying the launch to ensure that the CPU will work in the low quality boards. Your P35-E is NOT a low quality board, but since Intel is ensuring lowest common denominator you have no worries.

Oh goodie ... Now I can celebrate! Now all I need to worry about is where do I swindle the needed grand or so to get myself a new 45nm quad :[

 

[zach0624]

I'm just speculating here but could this have to do with AMD's botched phenom launch(and product)? They may not feel the need to release a product that may have more issuses than they would prefer and sit a bit longer on a product that will dominate everything else. You have to remember Intel does not have a lot of high or mid end competition right now.

 

[Maelstromm]

Originally posted by: zach0624
I'm just speculating here but could this have to do with AMD's botched phenom launch(and product)? They may not feel the need to release a product that may have more issuses than they would prefer and sit a bit longer on a product that will dominate everything else. You have to remember Intel does not have a lot of high or mid end competition right now.

As much as Intel would like everyone to think this it is delayed due to lack of competition, I call BS. Why give your competition time to recover when you can KO them? When was the last time a major corp gave a competitor a breather if it affected their bottom line? I can just imagine Jobs thinking, lets delay an iPod release to allow MS to finally develop a competitive Zune lol.

Has anyone considered Intel are purely holding consumers to ransom? The competition doesn't have enough bite, so they can now make us wait and force everyone to buy a much higher priced product when we all get tired of waiting. Just a thought. Unless AMD comes up with a killer package of price and performance with B3, Intel can release Yorkfields at a higher price point than they need to just because they know they have sold the consumer on the current quads. Either way, now is a very poor time for someone looking to upgrade. And I don't fancy selling a lung to get to 4Ghz.

 

[j0j081]

Originally posted by: Maelstromm

Originally posted by: zach0624
I'm just speculating here but could this have to do with AMD's botched phenom launch(and product)? They may not feel the need to release a product that may have more issuses than they would prefer and sit a bit longer on a product that will dominate everything else. You have to remember Intel does not have a lot of high or mid end competition right now.

As much as Intel would like everyone to think this it is delayed due to lack of competition, I call BS. Why give your competition time to recover when you can KO them? When was the last time a major corp gave a competitor a breather if it affected their bottom line? I can just imagine Jobs thinking, lets delay an iPod release to allow MS to finally develop a competitive Zune lol.

Has anyone considered Intel are purely holding consumers to ransom? The competition doesn't have enough bite, so they can now make us wait and force everyone to buy a much higher priced product when we all get tired of waiting. Just a thought. Unless AMD comes up with a killer package of price and performance with B3, Intel can release Yorkfields at a higher price point than they need to just because they know they have sold the consumer on the current quads. Either way, now is a very poor time for someone looking to upgrade. And I don't fancy selling a lung to get to 4Ghz.

edz has a new supporter.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Originally posted by: Maelstromm


As much as Intel would like everyone to think this it is delayed due to lack of competition, I call BS. Why give your competition time to recover when you can KO them? When was the last time a major corp gave a competitor a breather if it affected their bottom line? I can just imagine Jobs thinking, lets delay an iPod release to allow MS to finally develop a competitive Zune lol.

Has anyone considered Intel are purely holding consumers to ransom? The competition doesn't have enough bite, so they can now make us wait and force everyone to buy a much higher priced product when we all get tired of waiting. Just a thought. Unless AMD comes up with a killer package of price and performance with B3, Intel can release Yorkfields at a higher price point than they need to just because they know they have sold the consumer on the current quads. Either way, now is a very poor time for someone looking to upgrade. And I don't fancy selling a lung to get to 4Ghz.

This doesn't really make sense for Intel. You are essentially stating that it is Intel's intention to delay the release of Penryn CPUs (with the exception of overpriced, low-volume high-end parts) because AMD's lackluster competition gives them no incentive to improve. While delaying their Penryn processors, they are presumably allowed to continue selling inferior Core 2 Duos/Quads at stagnant prices, essentially milking the same technology far beyond its expected product lifecycle.

The reason why this makes no sense is that, while Intel could profit from self-inflicted technology stagnation, it could profit more from evolutionary product improvements. Penryn is, in any of itself, not a major improvement over Conroe/Kentsfield except when power consumption and heat output are concerned. Intel would benefit from shifting to Penryn products as soon as possible by saving money with the 45nm process and by pleasing OEMs with products that perform as well as (or slightly better than) their previous Core 2 CPUs while requiring cheaper/less extensive cooling solutions. If Intel found themselves in a position that never required them to ever improve their processors ever again, it would still be to their advantage to continue reducing production costs and power consumption/heat output.

Also keep in mind that Penryn is the result of R&D spending. Intel has every intention of earning back what they spent by selling Penryn CPUs at a greater profit margin than they sold Conroe/Kentsfield processors. Delaying the release of a product which represents R&D spending just to milk Conore/Kentsfield sales makes very little sense.

 

[RanDum72]

So, are we suppose to panic?

 

[zach0624]

Originally posted by: Maelstromm

Originally posted by: zach0624
I'm just speculating here but could this have to do with AMD's botched phenom launch(and product)? They may not feel the need to release a product that may have more issuses than they would prefer and sit a bit longer on a product that will dominate everything else. You have to remember Intel does not have a lot of high or mid end competition right now.

As much as Intel would like everyone to think this it is delayed due to lack of competition, I call BS. Why give your competition time to recover when you can KO them? When was the last time a major corp gave a competitor a breather if it affected their bottom line? I can just imagine Jobs thinking, lets delay an iPod release to allow MS to finally develop a competitive Zune lol.

Has anyone considered Intel are purely holding consumers to ransom? The competition doesn't have enough bite, so they can now make us wait and force everyone to buy a much higher priced product when we all get tired of waiting. Just a thought. Unless AMD comes up with a killer package of price and performance with B3, Intel can release Yorkfields at a higher price point than they need to just because they know they have sold the consumer on the current quads. Either way, now is a very poor time for someone looking to upgrade. And I don't fancy selling a lung to get to 4Ghz.

what I ment to say was that it might be because phenom ended up sucking so bad that Intel decided not to release penryn with some "minor" problem and correct this in a month or two without any worry that they'll be caught by the competition. I think they don't see much of a reason to release a product that would have problems and get people pissed especially since this product is on a newer sorta cheaper(die size wise) and more effiecent (energy and heat wise). I think that Intel would want as big a chance as they can get to deliver a KO punch to AMD(not that I think Penryn will do that, I think that Nehalem vs. Bulldozer or whatever AMD decides to actually ship, will be the defining round for AMD).

PS sorry for any grammar mistakes, been working all day getting ready for Xmas and am tired as hell.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: zach0624

Originally posted by: Maelstromm

Originally posted by: zach0624
I'm just speculating here but could this have to do with AMD's botched phenom launch(and product)? They may not feel the need to release a product that may have more issuses than they would prefer and sit a bit longer on a product that will dominate everything else. You have to remember Intel does not have a lot of high or mid end competition right now.

As much as Intel would like everyone to think this it is delayed due to lack of competition, I call BS. Why give your competition time to recover when you can KO them? When was the last time a major corp gave a competitor a breather if it affected their bottom line? I can just imagine Jobs thinking, lets delay an iPod release to allow MS to finally develop a competitive Zune lol.

Has anyone considered Intel are purely holding consumers to ransom? The competition doesn't have enough bite, so they can now make us wait and force everyone to buy a much higher priced product when we all get tired of waiting. Just a thought. Unless AMD comes up with a killer package of price and performance with B3, Intel can release Yorkfields at a higher price point than they need to just because they know they have sold the consumer on the current quads. Either way, now is a very poor time for someone looking to upgrade. And I don't fancy selling a lung to get to 4Ghz.

what I ment to say was that it might be because phenom ended up sucking so bad that Intel decided not to release penryn with some "minor" problem and correct this in a month or two without any worry that they'll be caught by the competition. I think they don't see much of a reason to release a product that would have problems and get people pissed especially since this product is on a newer sorta cheaper(die size wise) and more effiecent (energy and heat wise). I think that Intel would want as big a chance as they can get to deliver a KO punch to AMD(not that I think Penryn will do that, I think that Nehalem vs. Bulldozer or whatever AMD decides to actually ship, will be the defining round for AMD).

PS sorry for any grammar mistakes, been working all day getting ready for Xmas and am tired as hell.

Yeah you certainly have to wonder if Intel would have even held of releasing Kentsfield B3's to the market (meaning would they have held off until the cooler G0's were ready to go) were they not so paranoid and hellbent on beating AMD to the desktop quad-core milestone.

 

[Xvys]

I gots a 6-layer P5K-Deluxe, so I'm good to go ...payz to buy the best!

 

[tenax]

well, there's tons of theories, but i'll say this..i can't believe intel would be stupid enough to boost the prices over what we already know the prices for the new quads to be..i suspect a lot of people who are lined up to buy the new quads just wouldn't bother..especially given that core 2 duo is quite satisfactory, really at this point in time for most users. case in point..i have an overclocked e6400 that really, does everything i need it to do. for about 320 bucks for a 9450, i'm there. for 400+, i'm not..and i doubt it i'm alone on that. this is not the time to get in a price war with amd, even if the quad core product from amd is considered inferior..amd will see the crack and price/performance war intel again and while we win, both amd and intel lose on gaining any price ground. that's just my theory primarily based on the fact i don't think intel wants to bluff...they can have their cake and eat it too with best performance, at a reasonable price to consumers and keep a lot of amd converts (including myself) in the intel camp for as long as they can do that.

 

[Maelstromm]

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX

This doesn't really make sense for Intel. You are essentially stating that it is Intel's intention to delay the release of Penryn CPUs (with the exception of overpriced, low-volume high-end parts) because AMD's lackluster competition gives them no incentive to improve. While delaying their Penryn processors, they are presumably allowed to continue selling inferior Core 2 Duos/Quads at stagnant prices, essentially milking the same technology far beyond its expected product lifecycle.

Also keep in mind that Penryn is the result of R&D spending. Intel has every intention of earning back what they spent by selling Penryn CPUs at a greater profit margin than they sold Conroe/Kentsfield processors. Delaying the release of a product which represents R&D spending just to milk Conore/Kentsfield sales makes very little sense.

Good point. But working in the Pharmaceutical industry I know that it is often not possible to recover every penny spent on R&D. It is often products that have proven marketability that make up the bottom line. You are still thinking from the consumer benefit perspective. Execs and shareholders aren't. They want to see a greater return, and if they can milk the Kentsfield line for a few months longer without affecting their margins, they will do it. This buys them enough time to ramp up enough production for their distribution channels, as well as clearing existing inventory. Remember that moving from the 65nm to 45nm fab didn't cost them as much as the 90 to 65, so they don't have to worrry as much in recovering from the jump to a new process. Intel will likely see better profitability from the Xeon line than any Qxxxx line. Proof in point is the pricing of HP/Dell/Gateway pricing of Quad core lines. The enthusiast market isn't where the major companies make their money, it is the Average Joe who goes to Bestbuy/Circuitcity.

I'm most likely going to buy an Intel next round, read Q6600, but I'd still like to see a better price some time soon. I'm sure that come launch time, even with retailer price gauging, the Penryns will be in very short supply. I haven't seen a significant drop in Q6600 prices for the last 5 months, but I'm curious what prices they started at (B3 stepping, not GO). Like I said, I'm still looking for a bargain price on the processor and can't afford a $300+ part for 10% better savings in power consumption. The tradeoff seems poor considering a build cycle of 2 - 3 yrs, not 5 to 6 yrs when the savings will probably amount to more.

Merry Christmas everyone. Hope we get a good product soon, and apologies if my argument didn't make sense. I'm just looking get the best bang for my buck

 

[DrMrLordX]

Originally posted by: Maelstromm
You are still thinking from the consumer benefit perspective. Execs and shareholders aren't.

Not entirely. Keep in mind that the 45nm process lets them crank out more CPUs per wafer which can improve profit margins considerably, and it also lets them ship retail CPUs with weaker stock cooling solutions. Furthermore, OEMs can install cooler chips in systems with cheap cases with weak cooling solutions, allowing Intel to negotiate for a bigger share of net system construction prices for their CPUs and/or chipsets. If Intel can save an OEM $10-$20 in construction costs with a cooler CPU, they can bump up the volume price of the CPU by $5 over what they might be charging otherwise and still save the OEM some scratch.

So . . . there are actually some good reasons for Intel to keep pushing the envelope on process technology at the very least, even if an incentive to improve IPC and clockspeed really doesn't exist right now. They are going to have to clear out inventory on Conroe, Kentsfield, and Allendale parts, obviously, and they probably still have some Netburst-based junk sitting around as well, but . . .

 

[4Linux]

I just returned a QX9650 because it wouldn't work with my G31 board. Restocking fee of $175. That sucks because it was listed to work with the SFF I bought from the same retailer.

 

[PCTC2]

Welcome to AT Forums 4Linux.

Yeah, that sucks. I'm picking up a QX9650 soon. I'm still bummed that I have to sell my SLI rig off just so I could buy one of these. No more SLI... but instead I get an X38 Asus P5E3 Deluxe running dual 8800GTS's on a triple monitor setup. Oh well. I had to sell 3 computers just to buy this one computer. So long crunching farm. I hope this is worth it...

 

[4Linux]

Thanks PCTC2,

This whole thing stinks. According to the article at xbit labs
Linkey
most or all of the non-38 chipset boards don't work with 45nM CPU/s. That is a big deal but nothing is being said..WHATS UP.

There is something just not right there.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Maelstromm
I haven't seen a significant drop in Q6600 prices for the last 5 months, but I'm curious what prices they started at (B3 stepping, not GO).

It debuted at $850, then sold at $550 for quite a long time. It's only been ~$280 since September 12th.

Originally posted by: 4Linux
There is something just not right there.

You're right, they shouldn't still be making cheap, 4-layer motherboards.

 

[4Linux]

Originally posted by: myocardia

You're right, they shouldn't still be making cheap, 4-layer motherboards.

hmmm..... That statement shows ignorance. I will try to educate:

6 layer production while more expensive does not by itself determine quality or a better board regardless what marketing will have you believe. It becomes necessary when density or traces become to crowded and produces too much interferance.

What is not being said by Intel, retailers and manufactors is why this happened. It is not the 4 layer production by itself. I suspect it has to do with anti-OC protection in non-38 chipset boards and/or CPU's.

 

[taltamir]

Or maybe intel just has a nice positive PR reason to not releasing anything new while there is absolutely no competition from AMD.
Or maybe not, maybe intel really cares about the people who bought a crappy mobo and wants to delay the product to make sure it works with those.