Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Aug 2005 12:45 UTC
Intel Intel will unveil its next-generation processor architecture in just under two weeks' time, the chip giant said today. Due to ship in H2 2006, the architecture will result in "processors that are high-performance, energy-efficient and multi-core", the company said. "New form-factors" for PCs will be enabled, it promised. The beans will officially be spilled on 23 August.
Order by: Score:
Probably...
by Mr. Tan on Fri 12th Aug 2005 12:59 UTC
Mr. Tan
Member since:
2005-07-08

centrino for desktops!

Reply Score: 1

New form factors
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 13:01 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

You mean BTX? Not many companies are interested in BTX since ATX is good enough (case manufacturers). But Intel does have a grab on everyone's balls (Dell) and could force the companies to conform to BTX instead of staying with ATX.

Reply Score: 0

RE: New form factors
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 13:08 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I'm guessing the "new form factors" comment meant that something like Apple's Mac mini design would be much easier to do with the new Intel chips (possibly because you wouldn't need as much different chipsets on the motherboard, or as large heatsinks and fans, so you can dramatically reduce the size you need to use). And my guess is it is these chips that Intel used to persuade Apple to jump ship, so they should be quite impressive (if Intel delivers) once we get to see them.

Reply Score: 1

It's gonna be something real good
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 13:42 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I've been holding off on buying a new computer suspecting that something really good is coming from Intel. I figured Intel has to do something big to get back mindshare in the server room and on workstations. Also, there must be a reason why Dell talks about jumping ship to AMD and then jumps right back into Intel's lap. Then there's the fact that Intel stops talking about mhz meaning they can actually focus on a good chip design. Finally, for Apple to go through all that trouble to change cpu's, and then only do Intel...

Reply Score: 0

StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

Also, there must be a reason why Dell talks about jumping ship to AMD and then jumps right back into Intel's lap.

Yes. It's called "fishing for bigger volume discounts."

Reply Score: 2

Anonymous Member since:
---

Everyone always has something "on the way". Q2 of 06? How long have you been waiting? I can't imagine it's so revolutionary that it was worth stopping an upgrade cycle. Buy an amd64 already and grab whatever intel has to offer in another 2 years when it's actually available/priced competitively.

Reply Score: 0

mtnrover Member since:
2005-08-12

Everyone might want to read TheInquirer's take on Intel's "new plumbing". This Intel announcement is marchitecture.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25349

"... the one that they won't talk about for another week is called Cloverton.

So, Cloverton has a big problem, the MCM means two chips on a green, but not lime-flavorued. It tastes awful, trust me here, chunk of organic fiber glassish material. This means two bus loads on a bus that needed to be cut down already. Cloverton will be on a 1066FSB, which in my humble opinion is nowhere near enough. Think elephant breathing through its trunk. Then through a straw. Then through a coffee stirring straw. Now crush one of the two straws that make up the stirrer. Get the elephant to run until it gets winded. On a hot day. That is Cloverton."

I don't see anything new from Intel until 2008. While the Centrino unbrella has served them well by pulling in revenue, it's also a double edge sword. To change the plumbing requires ALL chips to change. That's a lot of resources and time. Yep - 2008.

Reply Score: 1

Anonymous
Member since:
---

They will unveil Athlon 64 FX ?

Reply Score: 4

Anonymous Member since:
---

For any moron that moded me down, alert: that was a _joke_. Anyway, me think that there was roumors about quad-core intel developement earlier this year (that's why multi-core reference instead of dual-core?). Now, that would be really something when it comes to Web and DB servers. But also hi-end desktops (games).

Reply Score: 0

StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

For any moron that moded me down, alert: that was a _joke_.

You may not have meant it seriously, but you didn't do anything to distinguish your comment from the anonymous inflammatory effluvia that we're all so used to on the OSNews comments.

Reply Score: 1

64bit, Multicore & Virtualisable
by nii_ on Fri 12th Aug 2005 14:05 UTC
nii_
Member since:
2005-07-11

Intel is already playing cathup and now perhaps surpassing AMD once again, particularly with the new virtualisation in the new processors, such as what will be supported in Xen. This is very useful indeed, and will certainly move me away from AMDs which I have been with for some considerable time.
64bit, Multicore, Virtualisable Intel chips! Thats great! If only they could run cool...
I'll certainly be waiting for the full anouncement. ('Waiting' in the loosest of terms).

Reply Score: 1

r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

nii, AMD is cooking up their own Hypervisor (processor virtualisation) called Pacifica.

So AMD will have "64bit, Multicore, Virtualisable AMD chips!"

Reply Score: 2

Finally
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 14:08 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I'm really glad Intel is improving its technology. I'd love to see a low-power, low-heat dual-core 64-bit Intel CPU for the desktop that offers a lot of performance per watt. Maybe this is what convinced Apple to choose Intel over AMD.

Speaking of AMD, improving technology is certainly better than Intel's activities alleged in the following document:

PDF of full complaint by AMD
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DownloadableAssets/AMD...

Try searching for the word "gun", "retaliation", "threat" in the document for some interesting hits that read like a movie script.

For example, searching for the word "retaliation" will eventually show the following hit in the PDF:

"In retaliation for Supercom’s AMD dealings in
Canada, Intel pressured Supercom’s customers to switch to another distributor."

Another example, a search for the phrase "gun to his head" yields the following:

"73. As Gateway executives have recounted, Intel’s threats beat them into “guacamole.” But Gateway is not alone. Prior to its merger with HP, Compaq Computer
received Intel threats every time it engaged with AMD. In late 2000, for example, Compaq’s CEO, Michael Capellas, disclosed that because of the volume of business he had given to AMD, Intel withheld delivery of server chips that Compaq desperately needed. Reporting that “he had a gun to his head,” Capellas informed an AMD executive that he had to stop buying
AMD processors."

Reply Score: 2

Can anyone say APPLE?
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 14:15 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Sounds to me like a perfect chip for those new Intel macs to me...You know Jobs loves sleek and sexy..whats more sleek and sexy that a Dual-Core Ibook at 3ghz??? I'd say close to nuthing, aside from that H2 is dead inline for when Apple said it would ship its first Intel-based pcs....(shrug)

Reply Score: 0

RE: Can anyone say APPLE?
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 14:27 UTC in reply to "Can anyone say APPLE?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

I would rather see an M processor than a dual core one.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Can anyone say APPLE?
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 16:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Can anyone say APPLE?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

I would rather see an M processor than a dual core one.

What about Pentium M dual-core? That's what Apple is interested about. It's coming 2006, Yonah as codename if I remember right. Tom's Hardware has more info.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Can anyone say APPLE?
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 16:19 UTC in reply to "Can anyone say APPLE?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

It won't run at 3ghz, you can bet your ass on that one. It'll be based off the P4m chip, which is currently maxing at ~2ghz. When they add all the extra crap necessary for a desktop chip, I'd be suprised to see it above 2.5ghz from the get-go, and on the mobile side it probably won't hit that till late next year if at all.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Can anyone say APPLE?
by phoenix on Fri 12th Aug 2005 19:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Can anyone say APPLE?"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

It won't run at 3ghz, you can bet your ass on that one. It'll be based off the P4m chip, which is currently maxing at ~2ghz

You're confusing two different chips. The P4M is just a mobile packaging of the Pentium4, still based on the antiquated, horribly-underperforming NetBurst architecture. The PM is the Pentium-M, the heart of the Centrino laptop platform.

Yes, the upcoming announcement will most certainly detail chips based off the PM. No doubt about it. It's the only chip architecture that Intel has that's worth talking about. Hopefully, though, this announcement will include updates to their horrid multi-processing technology. Their current SMP setup (which is used in the multi-core chips as well) is just nasty. Using the same bus to access RAM as peripherals? And dividing the available bandwidth with the other CPUs? Not worth looking at for any system with more than 2 CPUs.

Reply Score: 2

WTF H2?
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 14:24 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Is that an upgrade from H1B?
Does the chip come in a visa?

Reply Score: 0

Vapor
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 14:38 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Wow, everyone has gotten really excited about nothing more than marketing talk. Not that intel won't come out with something bigger and better, of course they will, but really there is nothing to see here.

It sounds like there is nothing next-gen about what they are going to announce anyway, not in the same way that p4 and amd64 were. This is just an updated pentiumM, which *does* sound good, however is not anything revolutionary.

Again, marketing talk. That is all.

Reply Score: 1

Itanium
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 14:58 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Me hopes that Itaniums branch prediction gets transplanted. ;)

Reply Score: 0

RE: Itanium
by abraxas on Sat 13th Aug 2005 12:22 UTC in reply to "Itanium"
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

It won't. If it did they would also have to transplant Itanium's massive cache and that would bring the chips out of the consumer price range.

Reply Score: 1

Can someone enlighten me?
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 15:21 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I love processor releases as much as the next geek but none of the plans seem really ambitious. For example, I was overjoyed to learn of the AMD opteron and opteron 64 FX2 releases - that was ambition. This Intel announcement is advertising repackaged existing technology. While certainly the capabilities of a low-power desktop processor and what Intel could do with it LATER would be great, there is nothing groundbreaking going on right now that would make me want to run out and build a brand new pc from one of these prospective processors. Maby they'll surprise us and announce immediate shipment of quad-core desktop processors. Now that would give me goosebumps. Surprise me Intel - AMD does it all the time - at a lower cost.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Can someone enlighten me?
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 15:37 UTC in reply to "Can someone enlighten me?"
Anonymous Member since:
---

They probably could announce quad core today, but there is no point in doing so from a performance point of view.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Can someone enlighten me?
by kaiwai on Sat 13th Aug 2005 04:35 UTC in reply to "RE: Can someone enlighten me?"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Hmm, depends on how they work the cores out; SUN is doing it with their Niagra, Intel could possibly provide something similar, with the added bonus of having cores that haven't had their FPU's castrated from them.

Reply Score: 1

Agreed
by Smartpatrol on Fri 12th Aug 2005 16:02 UTC
Smartpatrol
Member since:
2005-07-06

It sounds like there is nothing next-gen about what they are going to announce anyway, not in the same way that p4 and amd64 were. This is just an updated pentiumM, which *does* sound good, however is not anything revolutionary.

I was thinking the same thing. It seems that intel isn't inovating anymore they just repackage or rehash the same technology and give it a silly name. Dual Core? boring.

Reply Score: 1

@anonymous
by polaris20 on Fri 12th Aug 2005 16:39 UTC
polaris20
Member since:
2005-07-06

It won't run at 3ghz, you can bet your ass on that one. It'll be based off the P4m chip, which is currently maxing at ~2ghz

Do you mean the P-M chip? Intel hasn't been working on the P4-M for quite awhile, though it did max out at about 2.2 or 2.4Ghz.

Reply Score: 1

Pentium III re-packaged ...
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 16:50 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Thats all it is. P-M is based on on PIII and so its going to be a multi-core PIII ;) A Great leap forward.

Reply Score: 1

hmm
by Beryllium on Fri 12th Aug 2005 17:41 UTC
Beryllium
Member since:
2005-07-08

Does H2 mean Half-2, or is a typo for Quarter-2?

Reply Score: 1

Revolution
by re_re on Fri 12th Aug 2005 20:30 UTC
re_re
Member since:
2005-07-06

Intel brings in the worlds first quantum computing platform lol

Reply Score: 1

@anonymous coward 205.173.58.xx
by polaris20 on Fri 12th Aug 2005 21:21 UTC
polaris20
Member since:
2005-07-06

Thats all it is. P-M is based on on PIII and so its going to be a multi-core PIII ;) A Great leap forward.

Last time I looked, a PIII never came with a 533Mhz bus or DDR2 memory.

If you guys are going to spew false information, why not attach a valid name with your post?

Reply Score: 2

RE: @anonymous coward 205.173.58.xx
by abraxas on Sat 13th Aug 2005 12:31 UTC in reply to "@anonymous coward 205.173.58.xx"
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

He is right to a degree. The Pentium M is based off the Pentium III line of chips. Your arguement isn't a very good one considering even Pentium 4 chips vary to the point that they have different FSB (533, 800), memory types (sdram, ddr, ddr2), and HT vs non-HT.

Reply Score: 1

re: StephenBeDoper
by Anonymous on Fri 12th Aug 2005 21:54 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

"Yes. It's called "fishing for bigger volume discounts."

It's called losing marketshare/mindshare as people start buying from HP and other vendors because they provide the superior CPU chipset. Dell is not stupid. Sooner or later, people will start buying the better, cheaper chipset. If Dell saw nothing up Intel's sleeve, they would have also offered an AMD option. However, Dell talked to Intel, looked at their roadmap, and decided to sleep with Intel since once again Intel will provide the far superior technology. This way they keep their customer relationship with Intel when Intel gains the lead again.
Also, it makes sense why AMD has decided to sue Intel. By the time Intel comes out with the next generation of chips, AMD would have the superior offering for two years. During this time, AMD has just started to make a few inroads. AMD at the moment should be the most profitable in it's history but it's still bleeding cash. AMD knows that their lead in technology is coming to an end, and they will start bleeding a lot of money again. So what's a company to do when it should be at it's height but it is still getting its ass kicked? What's a company to do when it sees nothing but a steep downhill in the future? Sue of course. AMD action to sue also has started to make sense.

Reply Score: 0

RE: re: StephenBeDoper
by re_re on Fri 12th Aug 2005 22:21 UTC in reply to "re: StephenBeDoper"
re_re Member since:
2005-07-06

I am not pro Intel or AMD but right now and for some time AMD really has a quite large performance advantage over Intel, HP and AMD need to advertise their tail they off right now.

AMD could very easily capitolize on this

There are just no AMD adds.

Intel always wins out because they do so much fricking advertising.

AMD partnered with HP could do some damage on the consumer market, but for goodness sakes, most non techies have never heard of AMD..... get the fricking name out there.

I was just taking to a guy the other day who said he "reluctantly" bought an HP with an athalon64 cpu because the salesman pushed it... he wanted an intel box because he knew what it was. Needless to say he is very impressed with the Athalon64 and quite happy with it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: re: StephenBeDoper
by tnoflahc on Mon 15th Aug 2005 04:10 UTC in reply to "RE: re: StephenBeDoper"
tnoflahc Member since:
2005-08-07

Agreed, where are the AMD ads with Stomp (they can't exacatly use Blue Man eh?) thumping out some AMD jingle? Most of the people who I know, when they're in the market for a new computer, tell me that they want something with Intel in it. Obviously, Intel is superiour, because that's what you see on tv.

My dad just lost on BF2. He's using an AMD CPU online his harddrive to download the internets. Thus, I will draw the obvious connection.

Anyway, I don't think AMD can afford not to undertake a massive advertising campaign, as they need more than hr4dcore gamers and geeks (for lack of a better word. I am a geek, so don't think I'm attacking nobody none) as a market*.

This is a huge generalisation, thus I am going to ignore any "BUT xGROUP ALSO BUYZ AMD OK LOLS!!1one" comments.

You cannot take out a tank with a sniper rifle. Noted.

Reply Score: 1

Anonymous
Member since:
---

We're talking about CPU architecture, not the memory subsystem. Also, the FSB will ramp up on any cpu over time, generation gap or not.

Anyway my point is Pentium M *is* an extension of the "P6" architecture - PPro-->PII-->PIII-->PM. Netburst is (was) a failed experiment and now Intel is going Back to the Future.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22pentium+m%22+descen...

BTW posting anon is not equal to spewing false information. That attitude makes you seem like a pompus blowhard. You should get the facts before attacking AC's, or anyone for that matter.

Cheers!

Reply Score: 0

nimble Member since:
2005-07-06

We're talking about CPU architecture, not the memory subsystem. Also, the FSB will ramp up on any cpu over time, generation gap or not.

Newsflash: the process advances that allow higher clock rates, wider buses, bigger caches and such like aren't delivered by the Transistor Fairy, but by real engineers implementing and testing lots of small and sometimes big innovations.


Anyway my point is Pentium M *is* an extension of the "P6" architecture - PPro-->PII-->PIII-->PM. Netburst is (was) a failed experiment and now Intel is going Back to the Future.

And? Where's your problem with that? Any processor architecture is a compromise between speed, power consumption and cost, and the P6 architecture has proven itself to be a very good compromise.

Better than Intel's recent attempts at big-time innovation anyway: Netburst's overly long pipelines proved too power-hungry, and Itaniums explicitly parallel (read: in-order) architecture requires too much cache to make up for unpredictable memory delays and a huge instruction encoding.

Besides, the architectural improvements since the original P6 aren't insignificant, e.g. vector instructions, more execution units, better branch prediction algorithms, and micro-op fusion.

And of course AMD's processors use the same basic ideas as P6: on-the-fly translation of x86 into micro-ops, out-of-order execution, and a medium-length pipeline somewhere in the range of 12-16 stages.

Reply Score: 1

hmm
by Anonymous on Sat 13th Aug 2005 00:25 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

I think they'll announce the 45nm tech. Maybe even smaller. Dell sold 9 million computers to China but didn't make much money. Had to lower prices to compete. Back to school sale didn't do much either. That's Dell's situation as far as I know.

Reply Score: 0

other architecures
by Anonymous on Sat 13th Aug 2005 00:34 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

a shame other architecures are so expensive. would be nice if you could use UltraSPARC and "vanilla" PPC on the desktop for the same price. Of course bigger sales means less price, so no candy for geeks.

by the way, UltraSPARC IV was dual-core way before AMD, and runs at very close clock speeds. 1.5Ghz as far as i remember.

Reply Score: 0

RE: other architecures
by Anonymous on Sat 13th Aug 2005 00:56 UTC in reply to "other architecures"
Anonymous Member since:
---

Who cares? A high-end AMD smokes any SPARC or PPC.

Reply Score: 0

gee
by Anonymous on Sat 13th Aug 2005 01:33 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Now I have too hold off for another year before upgrading cause we all know this Intel paper launch is going to blow away anything the competition can deliver. Get a life people.
Nothing to see here and H2 means second half 2006.
I will have upgraded well before then from my current dual AMD MP system and at the moment it ain't going to be with Intel under the hood.
My current system has served me well for the last 2 to 3 years and still is putting along well. Now the AMD dual cores, they are something.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: 64bit, Multicore & Virtualisable
by nii_ on Sat 13th Aug 2005 08:03 UTC
nii_
Member since:
2005-07-11

Was hoping so but not had time to keep up with the latest news recently, so had not come across that info.

That'll be great. Competition is what pushes innovation.
I'll wait till both chips are out... Maybe I'll stay with AMDs on the next upgrade after all.

Reply Score: 1

Opteron
by Anonymous on Sun 14th Aug 2005 16:12 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Intel is somewhat forced now the new AMD X2's are konquering the x86 server market.

Reply Score: 0

Intel New CPU super power
by Anonymous on Mon 15th Aug 2005 16:06 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

Intel is good to make such marketing on the performance. Very Good BRAVO!.

What about performance and stability, not a virtual stability. A real one. We still find many problems in the processors that is making unvisible mistake on calculation and 0.001 second slower on data accessing. Why do we have such problem when it come to real demands on performance the cache get stressed and jam.???.
Intel is good but just for regular office work. we had to replace more then 2547 Intels system to AMD Athlon 64... mostly for cad designer, gamers...all said it dam freeze when we need more.

WHERE IS THE QUALITY OF THE PRODUCTS, PERFORMANCE IS NOTHING, TAKE A PORCH PUT DAM GAS...? DO U THINK SHE WILL RUN WELL . NO.

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Itanium
by Anonymous on Mon 15th Aug 2005 16:09 UTC
Anonymous
Member since:
---

mY FRIEND SOON A NEW PROCESSOR WILL COME TO MARKET.

HEBROS. WITH QUADRINARY CODES, AND WITH NEW OPERATING SYSTEM TRIWARE. WE MADE DOS TAKING BACK TO LIFE AND 400% MORE POWER THEN UNIX OR LINUX, MORE THEN 4876 COMMANDS, VERB OR NONE VERBS....


2010

Reply Score: 0