Slashdot Mirror
Intel Discusses Future Plans
heeeraldo writes "Tom's Hardware (unfortunately known for their one-page-stretched-into-nine articles, and endless ads) attended an Intel presentation about their future processor plans. The unsurprising bit: the endless march of additional cores. The surprising part: they're already focusing on 45nm processes." From the article: "Last week, Intel held a series of presentations at its Ronler Acres campus in Hillsboro, Oregon, whose facilities represent the main pillar of product design and manufacturing. These presentations included a short tour to the top-notch 65 nm production facility Fab D1D whose specifics Intel is currently replicating to other locations. The primary purpose of this show obviously was to convince around 80 analysts and journalists of the substantial health of Intel's 65 nm fabrication leadership, which is outputting new processors in high volume for launching new Pentium 4 6x1, Pentium D 900 and Core branded (known as Yonah) processors in early 2006."
FTFA.
they're already focusing on 45nm processes
substantial health of Intel's 65 nm fabrication leadership, which is outputting new processors in high volume for launching new Pentium 4 6x1, Pentium D 900
Now I think we all know why Apple did what they did.
Take off every sig. For great justice.
The surprising part: they're already focusing on 45nm processes.
Thats the only way to dodge their inefficiency problems. Outside of like, designing better chips.
Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
I couldn't help but think that this is just the newest assult as part of a press-release war between Intel and AMD. Recently, it seems AMD has been taunting Intel about the performance of its dual core technology. So it appears Intel's reponse is to say "your manufacturing process couldn't lithograph its way out of a paper bag."
The article is full of problems. Whitefield was canceled a couple of months ago:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27192
There is a lot wrong with the 45nm code names, and in general, it is lacking a lot of info.
If Intel gave him this info, it is blurring the lines for PR purposes, and somewhat flat out wrong. As of Friday, Whitefield was still dead, and the roadmap didn't match up with Intel's internal ones.
There is a bit of right there, but few if anything that can't be found at the usual places.
-Charlie
how is intel planning on confusing customers with their new naming schemes?
From TFA - "The introduction of the Merom design will be a turning point in Intel's product policy, because it will be the backbone for all processor families that go into the desktop, the mobile or the enterprise space. In contrast, the desktop and enterprise markets are provided with Pentium 4 and Pentium D NetBurst architecture processors while the mobility CPUs are derived from the more efficient Pentium M design"
:)
Merom being the sucessor to the forthcoming Yonah. Based on the recent AnandTech benchmarks of Yonah against desktop chips , it seems like Intel may not have to play 'catch up' for much longer. Of course, we don't know what else AMD has up their sleeve
-- Ravi
Your dates are a tad out of la-la land, but your heart is in the right place.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24638
It was linked here, but I can't find it.
The short story is that Intel's new VIIV boxes are crushingly DRM infested, and can load more. There is remote key revocation and all the things MS wanted, they are playing AMD off of Intel. Don't look to AMD to be any better, they are being screwed too.
I predict massive failure and egg on Intel's face here.
-Charlie
But first Intel or AMD will have to design a CPU that will get a geek laid.
AMD is getting close to starting its second fab in Dresden, Germany. Some time in 2006, it should reach full capacity. So I don't expect a shortage of AMD processors.
C - the footgun of programming languages
Who dreamt up the "Core" brand?
It's like when MS picked "SQL server" for their SQL server product.
A: What SQL server are you guys running?
B: Oh, we're using SQL server.
A: Yes, but *which* SQL server? Oracle? Sybase?
B: No, SQL server!
A: Yes but.... doh!
Now that everyone else have been selling multi-core processors for some time, Intel chose to brand their new processor geenration, of all things, "Core".
A: What multi-core processors are you guys using?
B: Oh, we're using multiple Core processors
A: Yes, but *which* multi-core processors?
B: We're using multiple Core processors!
*doh*
Oh dear oh dear...
It's hardly surprising that Intel is moving to more cores with 65 and 45 nm. AMD started doing that two years ago and just opened their newest fab to facilitate quad-core and octa-core future cpus on much larger dies. Right now, AMD has at least a one-year lead over Intel in this technology and there's no sign that Intel is doing anything that will leapfrog AMD.
If by "this technology" you are referring to process technology, you are wrong. Intel has a lead on AMD in processing technology, they were first on 90nm, first on 65nm, first on 300mm wafers, and I'm quite sure they'll be first on 45nm technology. AMD has a lead on Intel in multi-core technology, but you were talking as if it was the fab that was ahead of Intel. It's not, it is the chips that have a smarter design. If you could have AMD's chips on Intel's processing tech, they'd be superior to anything currently on the market.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Usually I don't feed the trolls, but what the hell... Let's start with just ATI stuff. Fuck, let's just pick ONE card and see if you can bat 0.500
... "I believe that you don't have enough interconnections on the PCB to take the full advantage of 512 bit memory controller.")
The Inquirer on R520 Pipelines
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22202 ("ATI placed 32 pipelines inside, but there is a chance that it will enable just 24 for a start.")
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22345 ("IT'S STILL NOT crystal clear what ATI implemented in its 24 to 32 pipelines, 300 millions+ transistor beast")
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23648 (R520 has 32 pipelines, 24 workin)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24423 (It's either 24 or 32, but we ain't telling!)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25730 (16)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25730 (Ok ok, really it was 16 pipes, we lied)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26618 (16 again!)
The Inquirer on R520 Clock Speeds
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22486 (1400MHz is really close to 1500MHz, good for running 24 or 32 pipelines)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24423 (Nice estimate of the clock speed there -- so close)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24698 (Er wait,.. )
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25898 (I would have thought by now you'd get the clock right....)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26010 (Still can't get that clockspeed right...)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26378 (Let me get this straight, ATI TOLD you the clock speeds and you still got it wrong?)
The Inquirer on R520 Launch date
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=20896 (May, October, close enough right?)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23097 (Getting warmer! Just one month away from the actual date!)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24203 (Oops that was one of your gems, Charlie. And I quote "mid-August for the lucky partners, and September for the real shipments." Nice pipeline estimates there too I might add)
The Inquirer on R520 Memory Controller
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26168 (Oh, remember this one before it was editted? 512bit addressing!!! Even after the edit it's still nonesense
Other Various Inquirer Thoughts
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22894 ("At least, in 2005 you will get R520 in an AGP version as well")
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21413 (You can always count on the Inq to even get the fucking name wrong)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21699 (..."We don't know many details about it yet, but we are almost certain that ATI plans to bridge the R520 chip with its Rialto bridge chip"...)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=26543 (How do you cancel a chip that nev
AMD has significant leads in both manunfacturing technology and cpu design. The specific AMD technology leads over Intel right now are their dual-stress liner technology, SOI, their use of hypertransport, and their implementation of the on-die memory controller. These are the areas that AMD has a 1-2 year lead in. The newest AMD Fab was built for 65 nm and can later move to 45 nm. AMD leads in other areas have allowed them to place less reliance on clock speed increases and process shrinks to achieve performance goals, in contrast to Intel for which clock speed and process shrink seem to be its primary performance tools. Clock speed topped out for Intel so now they have only process shrinks left. There is a lower limit on process shrinks as well due to physical limits so Intel is probably also scrambling desperately to catch up in the areas where AMD has surpassed them. Unfortunately for Intel, there are likely to be no quick paths to implementing the things that AMD has spent years developing.