Intel Ditches Mobile Phone Processors 104
An anonymous reader writes "Intel is planning on selling off their XScale applications processor and 3G processor businesses for around $600 million to Marvell. From the article: 'Marvell is best known for its NIC (network interface card) chips, including wireless chipsets, and for other embedded, network infrastructure, and storage processors. The company has not previously competed in the market for mobile phone chipsets. However, it says it knows how to produce chipsets for high-volume consumer applications, which it has done for 11 years. Marvell earlier this year acquired a UT Starcom business unit in China that is working on mobile phone processors.'"
In other news (Score:5, Funny)
Re:In other news (Score:3, Funny)
Headline is stupid (Score:5, Informative)
XScale is not, repeat not a "mobile phone processor" although I'm sure it's used there. In fact they specifically sold the PXA line, which includes the processor in my iPAQ.
It never ceases to annoy me when someone is so lazy that they can't even write their own headline - especially when it's wrong. If you're going to plagiarize, why not copy something that's actually correct?
Re:Headline is stupid (Score:1, Troll)
Re:Headline is stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Headline is stupid (Score:2)
Re:Headline is stupid (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:Headline is stupid (Score:2)
I contend that if it looks like you're holding a pocket calculator against your head, it's not really a mobile phone.
Re:Headline is stupid (Score:2)
Re:Headline is stupid (Score:1)
Re:Headline is stupid (Score:1)
Doesn't seem like a big deal. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Doesn't seem like a big deal. (Score:2)
Some people don't mess with intel stuff though... AFAIK all the motorola phones (for example) are based on motorola chips.
Re:Doesn't seem like a big deal. (Score:2, Informative)
From TFA on red-electronics.com, Intel will keep making the chips for Marvell until Marvell finds another manufacturing solution - probably TSMC or the like, my guess is.
Re:Doesn't seem like a big deal. (Score:1)
I also think it may be because of the nice tight relationship with Intel now-a-days... Just a thought.
What Happened to Diversification? (Score:5, Insightful)
Schwab
Re:What Happened to Diversification? (Score:2)
Re:What Happened to Diversification? (Score:2)
Do you know of a powerful (> 1GHz) and inexpensive (< $200) ARM mobo/chipset solution?
Re:What Happened to Diversification? (Score:2)
Are you asking because you specifically want that instruction set, or because you want a fast, cheap, and low-power-consumption chip? If it's the latter, the AMD Geode might interest you (it's an x86, though).
Re:What Happened to Diversification? (Score:2)
Wallstreet fashion driven (Score:4, Insightful)
This quarter's fashion seems to be divestment.
Anyway, Intel were not making much money (??were making a loss??) on their PXA line. The PXA plays in a highly competitive market with a lot of players (TI, Samsung,...) and very little brand loyalty (No Intel Inside message). Intel has never held up well to that sort of competition and have got out of many businesses when things got hot (RAM, 8051, USB chipsets,...).
Re:Wallstreet fashion driven (Score:1)
they killed Pentium... (Score:2)
Re:they killed Pentium... (Score:2)
Re:they killed Pentium... (Score:1, Informative)
Re:they killed Pentium... (Score:2)
...plus MMX.
if you're gonna say that... (Score:2)
Re:if you're gonna say that... (Score:2)
Re:if you're gonna say that... (Score:1)
Re:if you're gonna say that... (Score:1)
Whatever happened to the 186? Why do you hear of 286, 386, 486, and 586, but never 186?
The 80186 was an 8088/86 hybrid with on-chip peripherals. It was intended for embedded applications. The old unisys ICONs used them.
(that was from memory, but Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] backs me up on this. God I must be old to not only remember this stuff but also the NEC v20 and MOS 65xx histories...
186 was a real dud.. (Score:2)
Both integrated some extra logic to simplify design. This meant it had more pins, which led to it being the first Intel CPU in the family delivered in a PLCC package instead of a DIP.
Perhaps concidentally, the Motorola 68K family also had a chip that didn't go far, the 68010 (and 68012 and 68008), which integrated some logic and implemented some changes necessary for full virtualization. Apollo used this chip and I thin
Re:if you're gonna say that... (Score:2)
hmm. (Score:2)
Pentium also broke down instructions into ops, stuffing them into separate pipes. And since it had paralle
is the license transferable ? (Score:2)
now what happens ?
realistically I see more legs on a chip marketed from a company other than intel BUT
INTEL IS going to be pushed out of alot of markets simply because it does not have a solution for them now that Xscale is not in the stable
this is bad for intel but I suspect it makes a easy argument at exec level (well as these easy as these things can be ) because they want to be seen to
Re:is the license transferable ? (Score:2)
Re:is the license transferable ? (Score:2)
Re:What Happened to Diversification? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What Happened to Diversification? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What Happened to Diversification? (Score:2)
I guess that explains why everyone prefers them in the PDA and mid-size embedded market then. And I mean everyone from Gumstix to Palm TX to Dell Axiom.
I have no idea what you're talking about power consumption wise: can you name anothe
Everybody has a PDA (Score:2)
Huh? Everybody I know has a PDA they carry with them all the time. They also have a cellular radio built in.
Re:What Happened to Diversification? (Score:2)
Re:What Happened to Diversification? (Score:1)
Marvell? (Score:3, Funny)
Cute joke, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Cute joke, but... (Score:2)
lost billions of dollars (Score:5, Informative)
During the course of the past decade Intel invested between $3 billion and $5 billion in the assets it sold to Marvell, says Will Strauss, an analyst for Forward Concepts. Intel spent nearly $2 billion on a single acquisition to bolster those communications chip efforts. It was a major rat hole of unparalleled magnitude.
Re:lost billions of dollars (Score:5, Interesting)
How much did they spend on Itanium, again?
Re:lost billions of dollars (Score:5, Informative)
Re:lost billions of dollars (Score:2, Insightful)
Second, it isn't like all of the money that was thrown into the chip's design is wasted. Itanium was effectively a testbed for m
Re:lost billions of dollars (Score:1)
Re:lost billions of dollars (Score:1)
Marvel? Perfect! (Score:2)
Re:Marvel? Perfect! (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Marvel? Perfect! (Score:2)
Hell, My landline phone cant even remember its phonebook through a power cycle, and anyway the phone book is so un userfriendly, its never had more than one number in it.
I think both my mobiles already ahd supoer powers. My Nokia now even has "Frogger" - I am just waiting for "Lounge Suit Larry"
An event all too familiar... (Score:4, Interesting)
The IP Value is in the HDL Code, Not In The Chip (Score:1)
The alternative model is Qualcomm which develops a full chip set (everything, RF front end to the Sigma-Delta ADC/DAC that drive the speaker and hear the microphone.)which then gets bundled into assorted CDMA phone sets.
These chips don't require cutting edge speed, rather they are totally cost vs. feature driven. (How many toys and ga
Re:Apple to Intel theories (Score:1)
OK forget what I said... (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, we see they're not.
Hm. Lots of eggs going into only one basket. Is this because they took a financial hit on Itanium?
Bruce
Re:OK forget what I said... (Score:2)
that suggests that Otellini is actually buying himself some time with this sale.
Re:OK forget what I said... (Score:2)
Re:OK forget what I said... (Score:2)
Err, what? (Score:2)
Itanium to follow suit? (Score:1)
Because.... (Score:1)
Re:Because.... (Score:1)
Will it suck to develop for Xscale now? (Score:1, Insightful)
this probably has to do with DaVinci (Score:5, Insightful)
http://hardware.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/0
and
http://www.ti.com/corp/docs/landing/davinci/first
LoB
Re:this probably has to do with DaVinci (Score:3, Interesting)
The fact is that Intel royally screwed up the xscale processor - in a past life, I worked at an embedded Linux company, and once we'd switched from a 200 MHz OMAP chip to probably a 300 MHz XScale, our performance went way down. I/O, in particular, was atrocious on the XScale.
Add to t
Re:this probably has to do with DaVinci (Score:3, Interesting)
Simply amazing how Intel has blown not only the desktop CPU market but also the handheld/etc market.
LoB
Re:this probably has to do with DaVinci (Score:1, Informative)
Re:this probably has to do with DaVinci (Score:2)
LoB
Re:this probably has to do with DaVinci (Score:2)
"Intel Architecture" (Score:1)
marvell now limitless? (Score:1)
Interesting.... (Score:1)
Re:Interesting.... (Score:1)
Strange but not Incomprehensible (Score:3, Insightful)
On the other hand, while StrongARM was a reasonable contender in the ARM market, the initial XScale models provided virtually no real enhancement over StrongARM, and often increased power consumption in the process. This was a long time ago, but I remember some rather tempermental items on the Errata sheets. Intel simply wasnt cracking heads like the silicon giant it wanted to be. It just wasnt an impressive processor in any respect. Its probably three or four years old now, and Intel's decided the experiment has come time to wind down.
All this as newer faster better ARM cores keep showing up.
I really want to see what Intel's next move is. I am certain they're not going to drop the embedded sector, I know they realize how big it is, how massively its growing. What they're next heading is after this move, that should prove quite interesting.
-LM
Re:Strange but not Incomprehensible (Score:1)
There's also NS/AMD Geode. Of course not everyone agrees which use should be categorized as embedded. Probably neither Geode nor RDC is used on cell phones.
Because AMD will do so (Score:1)
the future of microprocessors????? (Score:1)
2. Intel sells its XScale microprocessor.
Collectively, this makes a significant portion of the >= 16 bit microprocessor market. (Sorry... I'm being conservative here. I suspect that both are 32-bit, but since I've been drinking a bit this evening, I'll error on the side of caution... )
What does this say for the state of (and the future of) the embedded microprocessor world?
Are they saying that these markets are
500ghz (Score:1)
Too bad (Score:2, Insightful)
developer perspective - good docs, good cast of supporting tools,
resonably inexpensive parts that could do a lot. Now it's going to
Marvell, whose tight assedness about documentation and NDAs makes
even Broadcom look like a bunch of free-love hippies. sigh...
Marvell - too bad (Score:2)
Question (Score:2)
iPod Impact (Score:2)
XScale not just for phones (Score:2)
Does anyone see this change impacting Sharp's PDA products?