Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Intel

Intel's Roadmap For the Future 135

A SV reader writes "SharkyExtreme just posted the confidential Intel desktop roadmap for CPUs. Intel is really pushing AMD with a Tulatin at 1.26GHz. and a Pentium4 at 2GHz shipping Q3 of 2001. Also -- Intel is not abandoning RDRAM but they are adding support of DDR memory. The bottom line is that Intel is developing SDR/DDR SDRAM chipsets for future Intel processors."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel's Roadmap For the Future

Comments Filter:
  • If this means they'll get the 1.13 GHz chips working? I mean hey - they could always clock them down to 1 GHz and sell them to IBM for thier new line of systems, the "Approxima". (Bad joke, recycled I know, but hey - it was the first thing that came to mind!).

    Brought to you by my trustly Athlon 650. :-)


    Fawking Trolls! [slashdot.org]
  • by Signal 11 ( 7608 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2000 @05:50AM (#768419)
    Well, if the roadmap is anything like Intel's usual meanderings we'll hear nothing but "Are we there yet, are we there yet?"

    --

  • by Phokus ( 192971 )
    Shouldn't they make sure they're able to get their 1 Giggers out before they make such plans?
  • wow, if only we could all evolve vertical relationships; imagine a world in which innovative front-end technologies ceaselessly synergize turn-key networks; it would be a landslide, a paradigm shift, a breakpoint. Now all I need to do is visualize my bleeding-edge niches and I will be complete...
  • Finally, Intel gets back to SDRAM chipsets (DDR as well, woohoo!). Guess that Pentium III 866 with the 820 chipset and 128 MB PC800 RDRAM is already obsolete. I was going to win that, too. Oh well, now for Northwood...
  • Intel: The World's Biggest Overclocker
  • You've been playing with the bullshit generator again, haven't you? I told you to stay away from that thing!

    --

  • Intel is really pushing AMD with a Tulatin at 1.26GHz. and a Pentium4 at 2GHz shipping Q3 of 2001.

    ...considering their past problems above 1 GHz [slashdot.org]. Maybe they should get their current chips working right in quantity first, m'kay? This is more vaporware from Chipzilla - don't believe it until you see it.

  • I'm pretty sure that sharkyextreme has the name wrong. I'm about 99% sure that the name they're trying to spell is Tualatin (a city in Oregon) rather than Tulatin (nothing pertinent). Since Intel is based in Oregon, it would make sense, and would also continue their choosing of Pacific Northwest names (Klamath, Willamette etc).
  • by chuck ( 477 )
    Intel is really pushing AMD with a Tulatin...
    Sounds painful and ignominious! I hope the Tulatin isn't as pointy as it sounds!
  • The text introducing the link leads one to believe that someone got their hands on an internal company document such as the Halloween documents (someone post the URL, if needed, please) which caused Microsoft so many problems.

    Even if some of the details were supposed to be "highly confidential", the fact that Intel employees were giving information to what is essentially a content website erases that idea somewhat.

    The information may be completely accurate or not, but it is the writer(s) at Sharkey Extreme who have put together the roadmap which we are reading, not Intel.

  • by DunkPonch ( 215121 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2000 @05:59AM (#768429) Homepage
    It's a little embarrasing how easily we get passed by RISC-powered motorcycles, but we can always pedal our little CISC bicycles a little faster.

    Sure, we get hotter and sweatier. Sure, we burn up even more energy. Yes, we know that 13% of all electricty used in the world is for powering computers (according to a recent U.N. summit). And we all know that most of the electricity is being generated through burning fossil fuels.

    Maybe we like 80-day droughts in Texas thanks to global warming.

    None of that matters, though. It's too much work to move to more efficient processor designs. Why scratch our heads over big-endian/little-endian translations when we can just slap on a bigger heat sink and cooling fan? Why give up our flying toaster screen savers?

    Let's stick to our 1970's-architecture processors for now. It was good enough for our pocket calculators, it will be good enough for mapping the human genome. Maybe we'll even find a way to alter our DNA so our skin is UV-resistant and our bodies need less water.
  • Out of curiousity, when did Intel become bad? Reading the posts on this board you'd think they were against everything sacred to Slashdot and the Open Source movement. If anything, aren't they for Open Source (does AMD have a Linux strategy?)
  • by Hanzie ( 16075 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2000 @06:01AM (#768431)
    Now that were going to have some "AMD SMP lovin," even on the cheap Durons, Intel is really going to be feeling a pinch.

    Especially since the new mobo's supporting this are going to be arriving soon.

    I'm putting off the current upgrade until I can get one of these babies.

    Intel, meanwhile, has removed SMP support from the Celerons. Oops, bad timing.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    New cases and powersupply will be required. I just spent over $1000 upgrading my Pentium machines to PIIs. I think I'll just stick with my freon-cooled-atx-case-in-a-freezer pIII 800mhz overclocked to 1.6ghz thank you

    -dk-
  • by uradu ( 10768 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2000 @06:02AM (#768433)
    ...is it just me, or does Tulatin sound suspiciously much like Too-Late-in? Just a thought...
  • ...Intel will be outgunned by the AMD Athlon until the 130 nanometer die shrink in 2H 2001, at which point they get SledgeHammered?

    Remember, they won't be able to produce very many of the *huge* P4 chips on their existing 180 nanometer fabs. It'll be like the 60MHz and 66MHz Pentiums were when they first came out (to ward off the Am486), only much worse.
  • by Chalst ( 57653 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2000 @06:08AM (#768435) Homepage Journal
    RISC won the IC design wars. Inside every modern CISC processor beats a RISC heart.

    RISC lost the instruction set wars, however. Once it was realised that you can translate CISC into RISC using a patch of silicon, the advatanges of switching from coding in CISC to coding in RISC sort of evaporated: you *can* have your cake and eat it.

  • With the recent problems with 1Ghz supplies and the instability of the 1.13 Ghz how credible is that roadmap?

    I mean, sure they might release those CPUs at those given time... but they also released 1Ghz about 8 months ago and I still have troubles finding one. I don't think AMD should be really worried by that.


    "When I was a little kid my mother told me not to stare into the sun...
  • Um, yeah, or perhaps a way to make us turn green [go.com] due to UV-radiation! Now that would really be cool... He he. He he.
  • It is horribly misspelled. The real name is Tualatin (Too-Alla-Tin), as anyone in the Portland, OR area could tell you.
  • Oh, no kidding! Intel's roadmap could be drawn by a 5 year old kid. "And then...and then... and then.."

    Tom's Hardware had a nice editorial at the beginning of the year, talking about where Intel and AMD would be by the end of the year. He showed even back then, that Rambus would be a bust, and when the rest of the world caught on, Intel would try to change course... but Intel is too huge to change course that quickly.

    This isn't really a plug or anything, but Tom's site was right on, 9 months later. AMD is kicking butt, their Thunderbird & Duron sets are working as promised, and Intel is still hyping vapor.
    "Let's release a comparable chip speed to deflate AMD's wind", but then ship only a few hundred?

    I don't care "who wins". I like the AMD prices, but have always suffered a speed hit, (I'll live). But I hate these type of marketing tactics. IBM did it back in it's waning PC days. Microsoft just did with the XBox crap. (ooh... they're coming out with a platform that will be better than the P2... in 20 months? duh.)

    Oh well. Do your homework. Intel's lies are starting to show. Check out the hardcore sites that have nothing to gain or lose either way. You can't even get that kind of objectivity from the evening news.

    Rader

  • I'm not sure how credible this roadmap is but I hope at least the plans for different memory types are correct.

    Make boards for several types and let us pick which ones work best. Maybe that would stick the proverbial fork in RDRAM.

  • Maybe Intel is getting their asses whomped in the market, but really, how far is it possible to push AMD? Moore's Law can't keep chugging along forever...

    (I tried posting this already, it posted somewhere else. Let's see if it works this time.)
  • I'm curious to know what the typical user will need a 2 GHz processor for. I can see how it will be useful for heavy number crunching, like image rendering and processing, or for map and routing VHDL to an FPGA, but most typical users don't do these things. Other than games, I can't see anything to do with a 2Ghz processor at home. What would you use your 2Ghz processor for?

    Dave

  • by hattig ( 47930 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2000 @06:17AM (#768443) Journal
    Intel are only moving their PIII line to a 0.13 micron process in Q3 2001, that is when the 1.26GHz PIII will be released. That is nearly a year away.

    AMD promised a speed step upgrade of the Athlon every 6 weeks - it started with the 1.1GHz Athlon a few weeks ago - the 1.2GHz Athlon should be released by the beginning of October. 1.3GHz in November, and 1.4GHz at the beginning of the new year. The Athlon is the PIII competitor - they have roughly the same amount of zoom in them, both 0.18micron at the moment etc. The Pentium 4, when it is released, will be a hugely expensive processor, trying to compete with Alphas from Compaq and Power3/4 processors from IBM. It is not going to compete for the desktop, corporate or home for at least a year.

    So AMD will be outgunning Intel for another 6 months, possibly 9 months in terms of GHz and overall performance (ignoring the Pentium 4, as it really should figure here, and even so, the overall performance of the Athlon 1.3GHz is likely to be more than the 1.5GHz Pentium 4!)

    Still, good to see Intel going with DDR SDRAM at last, and the move to 0.13micron fabs is great - although 1 taiwanese fab is already there and making stuff. AMD are going 0.15micron, probably using Motorola technology there, as the G4's were 0.15 micron...

  • AMD may not have a 'linux strategy' (btw changes to the core of linux to support new chips don't come form Intel either except for the VLIW Itanium because it's different then everything we have seen before), but they are very 'open source'. They have always published alot of info on their processors, conprehensive info on 3dnow, & most recently giving away LDT (Lightning Data Transport) bus technology on a open licence.

    Is it any wonder they should get more slashdot atention?
  • Intel was never really that bad until they decided to put ID numbers on their chips. Then they became like a big imperialistic satan. That is why AMD is so popular around here - they are just an alternative.

    That said, I believe that Intel is no longer placing ID numbers on their chips, although quite honestly if they were, we most likely wouldn't know it.

    stuart
  • Hmm.. Maybe you don't know how to look.

    I got a 1GHz P3 box from Dell with the 10% discount and a 2-week time to get to my doorstep. Cost me about $2k with lotsa cool stuff and a 19" monitor.

  • by SpinyNorman ( 33776 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2000 @06:25AM (#768447)
    I assume that was a joke?

    AMD will be at 1.2GHz THIS year, not Q3/2001!
  • BAD: Intel, Microsoft, IBM, Sun, KDE, Bill Gates
    GOOD: AMD, Linux(especially Debian), VA Linux, GNOME, Richard Stallman

    You can not be 1337 without this philosophy.

  • Moore's Law can't keep chugging along forever...

    Well then maybe they should have called it Moore's Approximation or maybe Moore's Pretty Good Guess.

    If you're right, I think it'll have to be repealed.

    -S

  • When someone coined the term Wintel. MS is evil so everything associated with it is also evil.

    Intel is also the big dog and AMD is the little guy. Everyone loves to route for the little guy and see the little guy beat the big guy.

  • You talk of intels vaporware but where are the SMP athlon chipsets? AMD claims the athlon can be used in dual or quad states but so far no one has made even a prototype. Intel isn't going anywhere in the high end server market until AMD comes up with a SMP design.
  • Tulatin Valley seems to think it exists And it's in Oregon. [bearcat1.com]
  • I'd use a 2Ghz processor for emulation [mame.net], encoding my CDs to ogg [xiph.org] files and compiling software [freshmeat.net] quickly. There's always a use for a speedy processor - but I wouldn't throw a lot of money at one just yet.
  • by Hammer ( 14284 )
    Mod up
  • Arent flames supposed to get moderated down?
  • This is mildly off topic but I have something to point out now. Intel and AMD in their ultimately stupid pissing contest have flooded the market with chips and will continue to do so. They are going to be so fierce in pushing out these bad @$$ systems that they are not stopping to really smell the roses, not like they would ever give each other the choice. Intel wants to stay on top, AMD wants to be on top just for once at any cost (no AMD is not on top Intel still out sells them a lot)

    Okay so Billy Joe bob bought a 600 MHz PIII with 128MB of ram, chances are billy joe bob isnt going to NEED another system to run anything in the near future at least 3-5 years.

    With SO many chips out there, most investors are making Intel and AMD just decent buys now not strong buys.

    This pissing contest does create a plethora of cheap powerful chips, but if the demand starts dropping off for them (which it is predicted it will) then these companies have essentially hurt themselves.

    They are right now creating a market full of bigger/faster chips and thats great but I have heard a saying work smarter, not harder and for some reason it seems to fit here.

    Do more with the same, not more with more. Meaning please start redesigning processors that are more friendly, yes I know its not always possible and there is a tradeoff somewhere.. But I think the tradeoff should be a lot less.

    Jeremy
  • No, Intel is based in Santa Clara, CA. They do a fair amount of production in Oregon, however.

    Yes, they do codename all their their chips after n'western cities (I'd be insulted if I lived in Mendocino or Timna BTW). Maybe it is a typo but how far back does it go? Did it happen when they founded the town, when Intel chose it as a codename, or when the Sharkster published the roadmap? Many names of Native American origin have multiple spellings -- in Wisconsin, there are at least three ways to spell "men-om-muh-nee", e.g. Menonmonie, Menominee.
    --
  • If I only had a nickel for all the morons who ask this question every time an Intel article is posted here...

    Let's see. I could probably use it to encode DVDs into CDROM size with divx. I could use it to decode divx and watch my DVDs. Yeah, today's higher-end PCs do this quite nicely, however DVDs and divx encoding are today's technology. There will be more CPU intensive technology tomorrow.

    Likewise, there will be people with 667-MHz P3s who will want to upgrade in a few more years. They'll obviously want something a couple times faster than what they already have or they won't see the speedup they want. And if there are 2GHz platforms out there, that means that the 1.667 GHz platforms will be much more affordable for them. And who in their right mind would complain about getting a very fast machine at a low price?

    If we all haven't figured it out by now, the presence of a high-end market makes everything more affordable to the remainder (probably 95%) of the market. With that in mind, I don't know what the hell people with a half a brain can possibly be bitching about when they hear about the 2GHz boxes on the horizon.

  • From near the end of the article :

    ICH3 - Integrated Controller Hub 3 adds six USB 2.0 ports. From what we saw at IDF, USB 2.0 is going to revolutionize external I/O on consumer systems. We just wish we could see IEEE 1394 instead.


    Intel will never support IEEE1394, and continue to push USB 2.0+ instead, because of the peer-to-peer nature of IEEE1394 - meaning you dont need a PC to connect compliant devices together. They like their own closed standard, which unfortunately is likely to become the de facto standard due with their weight behind it.

    So, don't expect IEEE1394 in Intel chipsets. Ever.
  • There may be a million different ways to spell it, but "Menonmonie" is not one of them. Menomonie (two n's) IS correct, however. Though it usually has the pronounciation indicated above, it is sometimes called "Me No Money", as Menomonie, Wis. is home to UW Stout [uwstout.edu], which is something of a party school, considering the student population is 3-4x larger than the town itself.
    --
  • If this is like Intel's latest roadmaps the destination will probably be reached, but after meandering through a few small hamlets, an out of the way tourist trap, and a few picturesqe look-out points. At which time they will discover that the picnic they were driving to has been over for three weeks.
  • Wait, KDE is bad again now? *Sigh* I can never keep up with these politics.
  • by Tet ( 2721 )
    Where is that market for a 2GHz desktop chip? Sure, there will always be people that need more power, but hardcore gamers, CAD/CAM modellers and other extreme power freaks account for a tiny proportion of the market. The vast majority just want to be able to run a word processor, an email applciation and maybe a web browser or spreadsheet. You can do that with a 300MHz CPU. Even allowing for W2K's bloat, and animated helpers and CPU-consuming fluff all over the place, I can't see where the need for that much CPU horsepower is going to be coming from. Intel's marketing department are going to have their work cut out.

    PS. Note that I'm talking about desktop CPUs here (which is what the roadmap is about). Servers are an entirely different matter.

  • Is probably because I hate to buy complete systems from companies like Dell or Compaq or whatever... I prefere to go to a local store and buy my PC piece by piece and build it myself. I think it gives you more freedom and sometimes even better prices than to buy prebuild PCs.

    Now to come back to my point I asked a couple of retailers in here (Montreal, Canada) and none of them can get any Ghz Pentium but all answered telling me that they could get an athlon.

    Sure no one even needs that much raw power on the desktop, but god if you say you will release a CPU please release it and make it available!
    We will see how things turn out but I have not been impressed by Intel lately...


    "When I was a little kid my mother told me not to stare into the sun...
  • All those important distributed computing projects like SETI@home and cracking some encryption program.
  • This of course adds nothing to the discussion, but Intel actually chooses codenames for Pacific Northwest RIVERS, not cities. The Tualatin River does exist, as do the Willamette, Dechutes, etc.
  • My guesses: games, creating and using more efficeint audio, video compression algorythms, voice recognition (if you're of the camp that it'll ever catch on in such a big way), et al...

    Who knows, maybe a "killer app" will emerge that's completely off the radar screen right now.

    By the way, back in the days of 40 and 66 MHz processors, did we ever really think that we'ed be able to fully utilize a 400 Mhz machine? Or not even fully, but be able to occassionally spike it's CPU usage up near 100%? Doubtfully...
  • Sure, and when did they say Itanium (formerly Merced) was supposed to be released?
  • Billy Joe bob bought a 600 MHz PIII with 128MB of ram, chances are billy joe bob isnt going to NEED another system to run anything in the near future at least 3-5 years.
    Wrong, Billy-Joe-Bob (BJB), runs windows, windows haves the speed of your hardware every year, and trashes your hard drive (At least I think what the swap file is for. :-) Thus next year, BJB will at least need a new hard-drive or reinstall, provide BJB doesn't install any new software, if so then BJB will need a new computer. Recall the Triumveate that founded Linux, the thrid leg is Mr. Gates if he did write all that shitty software, we wouldn't have all this nice cheep "Obsolete" hardware to play with. Plus BJB also get into pissing matchs wants a faster computer than JBJ (john-bob-joe) thus may by a new computer anyway....
  • by Ndog ( 230982 ) on Tuesday September 19, 2000 @06:51AM (#768470)

    In an unprecedented move today, Intel announced that they would be taking the processor battle to another level, changing there previous policy of one press release a month to one a week. They stated that they will be announcing the release of faster processors weekly, a move that clearly has competitors worried.

    In related news, AMD quickly responded by announcing a new, faster processor press release will go out twice a week, a policy that could be revised as soon as December.


    Spooon!

  • I have opinions. I express them strongly. That doesn't make them flames.

    Flames are when you attack someone directly. Flames have no supporting evidence. I presented an opinion (widely accepted, I might add) that the Intel x86 architecture is outdated. I also believe that it is inefficient, power-hungry, and its continued widespread use will worsen already bad environmental issues. I also cited a recent statement from the U.N. global conference that 13% of the world's electricity usage goes to computer systems. The fact that most of electricity is generated by burning fossil fuels is undisputed. The fact that burning fossil fuels contributes to global warming is disputed by some, but they all seem to have a vested interest in corporate industry. Their credibility is somewhat questionable.

    I'm sorry you think I'm flaming. I have admittedly flamed before. However, opinions contrary to your own are not automatically flamebait.
  • I've noticed this for a long time. Intel is the enemy, regardless of what they do.

    I forget the entire list of past transgressions, but I'm sure they included expensive, NDA-bound programmer's guides, the Pentium bug(s), weak real-mode/graphics support for Pentium Pro, the ID number fiasco, weak power management, lack of elegance, and lately I think its been for just not shipping 1+Ghz chips in large quantities.

    But hey, it's Slashdot politics. If its not being managed by a global team of non-Americans for the betterment of Linux, there's something evil about it.

  • This is funny:

    Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue [bearcat1.com] misspelled its own name!

    Proof of this is that Tualatin is spelled correctly in the medallion.

    The name is Tualatin, and Sharkey's Extreme has it wrong in the early parts of the article.
  • Intel is really pushing AMD with a Tulatin at 1.26GHz. and a Pentium4 at 2GHz shipping Q3 of 2001.

    Haha, whoops. I thought the Pentium4 2GHz would be shipping with Quake3. I gotta stop playing games as much as I do. Anyways, I'm an AMD person. I used to be 3dfx until my eyes caught on the GeForce2 GTS 64mb (Which I proudly own). Maybe the P4 will impress me enough to switch out from using AMD. Hell I went from my Celery 333 to Athlon 750. I could very well switch to Pentium4 if it's worth my money.

    -PovRayMan
  • 13%?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? WHERE DID YOU GET THAT?!?!?? I doubt 13% of the world owns computers I know that less than 10% of my electricity bill is from my computers(I have 7). Now how does that equal 13%?!? Besides, are you really going to trust the UN?
  • Not only that, but according to AMD roadmaps, It appears that AMD will simply ignore the (apparently legarthic) P4 and trounce Intel with the Sledgehammer in 2001.
  • Agreed. You know what's more efficient for many tasks? SMP!

    Instead of one cutting edge chip pushing really fast (and being expensive, hot, etc.), most systems would do fine with two or more slower CPUs. The slower (older) CPUs are cheap and stable because they bleeding edge moved away from them.

    People need to think about absolute speed vs. throughput. For a game you probably want absolute speed. But for word processing, web browsing, playing MP3s, and photo editing all at the same time, a SMP system composed of slower processors is a very good solution.

    Operating systems and apps will have to improve to make this work. Windows 95/98/ME don't do SMP, and that is where most home users are. Running many independent apps (mp3 player, netscape, etc) concurrently will work fine, but Photoshop is one of the few examples of an app that will partition its work and use multiple CPUs well.

  • Yes, we know that 13% of all electricty used in the world is for powering computers (according to a recent U.N. summit).

    Could you give a reference for that? Sounds rather dubious.

  • This is stupid. You post a link to some one else's story, and they clearly state that it isn't from intel. It is just what they think. "This information is not from Intel nor is it solid fact."
  • I think they are trying to be aggressive to beat out AMD at something these days. They have good cpu's, but can they deliver more than one cpu on their release dates? what really is a 'release' to them, they 'have' one cpu that is past beta?
  • Seriously, the downfall of the AMD processors are two things: the incompatibility of the Athlon to the x86 architecture, and the instability and unreliability of the chipsets. The AMD 750 worked OK, that is, as long as you bought some peltier units for the chipset as well as the CPU. Also, AMD's legacy of overclocking (as well as general overkill) leads to even more stability. Ever tried to pass 100 amps through a 12-gauge wire? I DON'T THINK SO! It's basically the same thing with the Athlon clocking PC133 RAM at 200 MHz.

    Regarding the chipsets, VIA's struggles are laughable. The boards always fizzle under the pressure (either physically or performance-wise). They embrace such gaudy, redundant standards as DMI, ACPI, and AC97. Their 4-in-1 drivers always introduce new problems into the system, after the driver engineers just got finished with last month's bugs. Currently, there is no Linux distribution whatsoever that can run any VIA chipset 100%. Even if the system is running, the ATA chipset is running on PIO 4, and the sound system can't be initialized. What do you expect from the world's only sweatshop PCB manufacturer?

  • WTF?

    Like Intel is all that these days. What about an AMD Roadmap? They're the ones that have truly broken the 1Ghz barrier:
    ...they have Ghz chips in decent supply on the market (Not just OEM dists)
    ...they haven't had no farkin recall.
    Right now the only roadmap Intell should be following is catch-up with AMD's footsteps
  • Not 13% of the world. 13% of the world's electricity. A lot of places in the world don't even have electricity. Of those that do, 13% of the electricity is devoted to keeping computers running.

    Remember, a huge portion of power consumers are corporate users. Computers/monitors on every desk, computers in the server room, etc.

    Why would I not trust the UN? I personally don't buy into the "New World Order"/"One World Government" conspiracy. Nor am I stockpiling weapons to fight off the blue-helmeted invaders.
  • I've been looking for this P3 mentioned here (page 11) [intel.com] but I think it only exists in Intels mind. Anyone ?
  • The statistic comes from futurist Hazel Henderson. It was made on September 9 at the U.N. Millenium Summit And World Forum. I found it exactly:


    ...our information economy is based on high speed computers that "gobble up 13 percent of all electricity generated...."


    Facts are facts. Facts don't care what anyone believes.
  • ROOT, ROOT, not "route for the little guy", but "root for the little guy!" (and not "root the little guy" either ;) ).

    I guess you aren't a Linux/BSD/Unix user :) We are going to have to teach you the appropriate use of "root"!
  • Well for starters you as will most Joe Sixpack assumes that a 2GHz is 2X 1GHz...
    That is nowhere near true due to how this beast works. In Intels own demo of the new processor the compared a 1.5 GHz P-4 against a 750 MHz P-3.
    My guess is that if you have a 6-700 MHz today you may want to upgrade to 1.6-2GHz to be able to run the next WinDoze.

  • The Sharkey's Extreme article is spread out over several pages to force you to see ads which you are probably not seeing, since you have trained yourself not to look.

    The following links are pages that show Intel CPU plans, and are useful for someone planning a computer purchase who wants to avoid early obsolescence. (The spaces in Page X are put in by a bug in the Slashdot code.):

    Pag e 7 [sharkyextreme.com], Pag e 8 [sharkyextreme.com], Pag e 9 [sharkyextreme.com], Pa ge 10 [sharkyextreme.com], Pa ge 11 [sharkyextreme.com], Pa ge 12 [sharkyextreme.com], Pa ge 13 [sharkyextreme.com]

    Those who use the Opera browser [opera.com] can load all the pages simply by holding down the control and shift keys while left-clicking on the links above.

    The initial name for one of Intel's chips is Tualatin, not Tulatin. Sharkey's Extreme has it wrong in the first part of the article.

    This is funny:

    Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue [bearcat1.com] misspelled its own name! Proof of this is that Tualatin is spelled correctly in the medallion.
  • You'll need all that speed, and memory too just to load the next release of WinBloz2K for home desktops. After the next round of bug fixes and patches, you'll use it just to get the damn box aware in about the same time it take Linux or a BSD to show prompt on a 66Mhz 486 with 32 meg o' RAM.
  • Why should Intel support an Apple design? Who wants to pay money to their competitor?
  • Facts are facts. Facts don't care what anyone believes.

    Argumentum ad verecundium. You still have yet to support the claim. Just saying,"Bob Smith said it, and he must know, because he said it on TV," isn't proof.

    Yes, that's a straw man, but you still haven't proven anything.
  • Arrgh! No! I can't fight it! Must do muppet song....

    men-om-muh-nee
    do do de doodo
    men-om-muh-nee
    do do de
    (repeats indefinitely)

  • SharkeyExtreme seems to be biased towards Intel, I read their P4 unveiled article yesterday and it never really questioned what Intel has been saying about the processor, all they did was regurgitate Intel's marketing department crap.

    I don't watch SharkeyExtreme very often but from these two articles they seem like intel zealots who don't really look deeply into the processor problems and see what truly is going on. I don't doubt this article at all, I just question the depth of the article. I don't see any true questions raised about the chips and chipsets just repetition of how good they will be and how much they will give AMD a run.

    Yhcrana

  • In historical order:

    1. Total domination of motherboard chipset market. At first (before Slot 1) nobody cared because you could run your AMD and Cyrix chips on Intel chipsets.

    2. Slot 1. Now Intel makes their bus protocol proprietary. Meaning AMD and Cyrix can't stick their chips on Pentium 2 motherboards. And because of (1), they must now depend on inferior 3rd party chipsets.

    3. RAMBUS. Intel pushing slower, proprietary, and expensive memory to get lucrative shares in the company. And then not providing quality SDRAM mobo chipsets after 440BX to force use of RAMBUS.

    4. Demanding an injunction against VIA to stop all imports of their chipsets. There would then be no Athlon motherboard chipset.

    5. Possible: www.faceintel.com . But perhaps not enough people know about it to make an impact.

    6. Probably other stuff too =P
  • One thing you learn working around the gov't is that if you collect enough nonclassified information together you may eventually end up with a product that ends up being classified. It is quite possible that the people being interviewed did not individually expose any company secrets, but when everything was corelated together a bigger picture was revealed.
  • You just had to throw the glowing bunny at us, didn't you? :)
  • Aren't Athlon motherboards proprietary? Can I run a PII, PIII or other chip in an Athlon board?
  • ArsTechnica has a pretty decent article:

    RISC vs. CISC: the Post-RISC Era

    http://www.arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/risc-cisc/rv c-1.html

    (please support my karma whoring...slashdot is eating my karma for some reason ;)
  • ... never asks for directions. That's why they are always late. :)
  • The market is those persons you already described. They need the 2GHz chips. I assume you read the article where it went into detail about Intel's plans for the Celeron? Since you read the article you know that the vast majority of consumers will never buy a box costing more than $2000. These people will be perfectly happy with the low end of the market, which is just the high end of the market trickling down in price. WindozeMe will slow any computer down about 100MHz. Consumers who want to buy another PC will then one with a faster chip.

    I would guess that it is probably about as cheap for Intel to fabricate 600MHz Celerons as it was to fab 400MHz versions six months ago.

    The price stays the same but the power increases.

    Was it you a year ago crying that there was no market for 1GHz chips? You'd be foolish to say that now. Excuse me now, I'm going to go play Quake III at 1024x768 on HIGH while downloading game demos using Getright and keeping Netscape and ICQ open for the convenience.

  • I think you overestimate the number of people who can give a crap and just want it to work, and what do hard drives have to do with processors ? :P
  • There is nothing an average user would need this kind of CPU for. Not even games. Currently the 3d games are NOT CPU-limited. They are video card limited. Just check out the benchmarks. At 32 bit color and resolution of 1024x768 and above, the CPU becomes irrelevant. Even a Celeron is able to completely saturate the video card with data. Of course when faster video cards come out, then the CPUs will need to get a little faster too, but nowhere near 2GHz. Now, considering that Microsoft is falling behind in the bloatware department (i.e. you don't need the latest CPU just to run the newest version of Windoze and Word any more), there is nothing else that would require this kind of power.
    What I would like to see is faster buses (regular PCI is too slow for say a nice SCSI controller), better HD interface (IDE sucks), and (gasp!) DDR memory. But that is not Intel's agenda.
    ___
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Arggg! more of this CISC is now RISC crap.

    Here is a pretty good (though incomplete) explanation why modern x86 processors are not equivalent to RISC processors:

    http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID= RWT021300000000

    Stop spreading 5 year old Intel marketing lies.
  • I think only Dell, the Intel's bitch, got it. Never seen it anywhere else.
    ___
  • A couple of quotes from recent AMD Reseller Conference [jc-news.com] :

    "A couple of other interesting things from the conference. According to the technical presentation the multi-processor board will be able to support only 2 processors on the Northbridge. We were told that the current Athlon chip has no issues with multi-processor functionality, the issue lies in the way that the Northbridge chipset was designed. Also, according to the tech guy the multi-processor boards will be able to use processors with differing speed grades (i.e. a 700MHz and a 900MHz processor running on the same board simultaneously). AMD will use the LDT bus to connect multiple Northbridge chipsets to allow multi-processing with more than 2 processors."

    "As was pointed out previously, the North Bridge only supports 2 CPU's, however, the LDT bus supports multiple North Bridges, so 4, 8, and 16 CPU (and theoretically more) configs are possible one the LDT bus chipsets come out, mid 2001..."

    "The LDT bus runs at 800Mhz, and 1.6Ghz clock rates, which means it can move 6.4 Gigabytes of data per second each way, 48 times the bandwidth of, and at a lower latency then the current PCI bus..."

    "Based on their Diagrams, the CPUs' will communicate to the 'memory hub' across the EV-6 bus (at 266Mhz, moving to 400Mhz eventually), and the memory hub will communicate to peripherals across the LDT bus, which includes the I/O Hub, at 800Mhz (moving to 1.6ghz eventually)"
  • AMD uses the Alpha's EV6 bus protocol. Presumably the EV6 was either open or had cheap licensing. Intel uses their own, and won't willingly allow a competitor to use it. Cyrix managed to gain access as a result of a cross licensing agreement which had this unintended consequence. The VIA bought Cyrix and managed to inherit the rights. AMD most definately would have preferred to license use of Intel's protocol instead. You can't run a P2 or P3 on an Athlon board because Intel's processors only support their own bus protocol. But Intel could make such a processor if they wanted to, but they have no reason to.
  • Do other chips from manufacturers outside the major two (AMD and Intel) currently make a chip that runs on an Athlon board?
  • #1. This is not a confidential intel roadmap, nor is it even represented to be one. It stipulates all that on the first page.

    #2. Even if it was direct from the horses mouth (or Intel's) it would not be meaningful except historically. Intel has been lately forced to rush their chips to match market forces where for years they were able to determine their pace of innovation on their own. As such we have watched them flounder.

    #3. As to WHO needs 2ghz chips, who needs more than 640k ram? In 5 years we have to assume that applicaitons will be much more involved on some levels. The idea of wordprocessing might be dead by then, with dictation as the primary purpose. Multimedia interactive reports might be the norm, and pure text might be considered retro...

    #4. Multiple Processors would be nice if we had truly modular computers. I would love to see a computer which you can just snap together from parts and increase in ram, processors, storage, and such without any limitation, and without turning off machines. Anyone wanna give me some money to create it?

  • Well, except that it's Tualatin, named after the Portland satellite city of the same name, which is where I happen to work. It's roughly pronounced tuh-WA-lah-tin. Be wary of placing too much faith on the spelling of Slashdot stories.

    And for the record, Willamette is pronounced wi-LAM-met, not wi-lam-MET. Don't ask me why; I'm originally from Tennessee and I think Oregonians talk funny, too. ;-)

    --

  • Heck, I was muttering that as I tried to use the website. Could Sharkey's have less information per page?! My god, it's just painful to use that site -- and several of his competitor's sites.

    It's not like they actually get paid for each page download, is it?

    The webmasters of these hardware review sites would do themselves a favour if they tested their designs. I seriously doubt they're getting more click-throughs with this mini-page design. If they are, well, then, I'm just weird.

    Last time I was at Anandtech, I was able to use a dropdown menu to leap to the concluding remarks. I loved that: cut to the chase; if it turns out I'm interested, I'll go back read the rest of the review.

    When I come across a design like Sharkey is using, I tend to give up before I get to the end. I know that someone else will publish much the same information, or will convienently summarize it for me in a weblog.

    Sharkey, are we there yet?

    --
  • Take a look at Maximum PC's article about the Athlon and GeForce (original GeForce). The specifications for the original GeForce called for an Intel Pentium II, III, or 100% compatible. Now from what you say, it should've worked. But it didn't. There were thousands of Athlon owners who couldn't even get Windows 98 to run straight (this was before Win2K was released).

    As for the chipset, my 440BX is at about 90F. The DDR RAM chips on my GeForce 2 are usually about 110F. My P3 is about the same. I dare you to stick your finger on the 750 chipset and the CPU itself. Chances are, you can't even hold it on there for more than 300 milliseconds before getting scorched by the 180F heat.

    As for the boards, at least mine wasn't built in a sweatshop. Speaking of foreign, I'm guessing that you are of either German or Russian nationality. Considering that AMD is funded by the German government, the very fact that you step right up to their defense solidifies my theory. "They are %100 percent compatible." Isn't that a little redundant?

  • I checked the electromagnetic spectrum, and microwaves (specifically, the frequency used in the kitchen appliance) are 2.5 GHz. Is there anyone else worried that their CPU could become a magnetron?
  • Video editing. Believe me, it's going to be huge.
  • Maybe you should comfort yourself in the fact that we've got a government. And the government checks to make sure harmful things don't reach consumers. Hell, they'll take you to task for not putting "Caution: Hot things may be hot" on the side of your mugs, and you think they'll let microwaves get through?
  • > Be wary of placing too much faith on the spelling of Slashdot stories.

    Well, I took advantage of the opportunity and ran with it. It would be a very fitting name anyway.

    > [...] and I think Oregonians talk funny, too.

    He, he, and that coming from a Southerner. Go figger...
  • by Tet ( 2721 )
    Was it you a year ago crying that there was no market for 1GHz chips? You'd be foolish to say that now.

    Would I? I'll never claim that there's no market for high performance chips, but I still can't see a mass market demand for 1GHz CPUs. Yes, Intel/AMD's marketing depts may be able to convince the world that there's a need, and thus artifically create a demand, but in reality, very few people have a need for chips that fast.

  • It's because these sites lack something that the printed magazines possess: credibility. They're too afraid to put something in print, they might be wrong, or worse, the company might sue them. But think about it: why aren't reputable computer manufacturers using AMD CPUs? Dell, HP, Micron, they don't use anything AMD, not even their SCSI or network controllers. Their servers are Xeon, their workstations are P3. These companies would rather avoid trouble with AMD when the chip makers gets busted for consorting with the German government to take over the world. As far as AMD's deals are concerned, I believe that they are forming a secret faction with the German, Russian, and Chinese governments to build a fourth reich.

You had mail, but the super-user read it, and deleted it!

Working...