Report: Intel Scheduling 22 nm Ivy Bridge for April 2012

[Guest]

Following a report that AMD is scrapping the production of its 28 nm processor at GlobalFoundries, there is a note that Intel may also be delaying at least some of its 22 nm processors due to manufacturing hiccups.

Report: Intel Scheduling 22 nm Ivy Bridge for April 2012 : Read more

 

[JamesSneed]

Of course they are in no hurry since Bulldozer has been weighed and found wanting. I'm sure Intel won't drag its feet to much since they learned not to do that the hard way.

 

[Raidur]

>5ghz on air here we come!

 

[kcorp2003]

i'm still rocking my 2008 build. deciding if i should upgrade or buy the new consoles. Xbox 720

 

[kilo_17]

Man, AMD is falling farther and farther behind Intel

 

[JohnnyLucky]

Looks like no upgrade for me this year.

 

[verbalizer]

this gives me some more time to start acquiring hardware, first up is a Z68 mobo.
running a Core i5-760 @ 3.52GHz I was able to pass over Sandy Bridge, I will not be skipping Ivy.
even with AMD and it's 'Bulldud', Intel is again pulling way out in-front..

 

[Guest]

there really is no point to upgrade from Lynnfield unless u need a new motherboard to sli or crossfire or need Quick Sync.... a 3.52GHz i5-760 will run circles around anything AMD has to offer

 

[danwat1234]

I'd hope that Intel would release a 6 core mobile CPU, or at least a high clocked quad core mobile CPU (3GHZ + constant hopefully) instead of just focusing on low tdp. Power efficiency is awesome but bleeding edge needs to be there too.

 

[Guest]

lets be careful before we king Intel and champion of the decade, IvyBridge has the same likelyhood to be a failure as Bulldozer, nothing is set in stone

 

[ikyung]

[citation][nom]danwat1234[/nom]I'd hope that Intel would release a 6 core mobile CPU, or at least a high clocked quad core mobile CPU (3GHZ + constant hopefully) instead of just focusing on low tdp. Power efficiency is awesome but bleeding edge needs to be there too.[/citation]
Yeah, powerful mobile chips would be nice, but if I had to choose between horsepower and power efficiency for my mobile devices, I would definitely pick power efficiency. I would love for my laptop and smartphone to last me at least 16hours of heavy use.

 

[johnners2981]

I'm not an intel fan boy but I prefer being given a release date in advance. Hopefully amd will learn with their next cpu release and not do what they did with bulldozer

 

[kd0frg]

im not sure i understand 100%, does this mean we can buy ivy bridge chipset motherboards and ivy bridge cpus in april? or is that only when the manufacturing process starts and we will have to wait several more months to actually be able to buy it?

Im currently running a first gen i7 1366 platform, i skipped sandy bridge, figured id get either bulldozer when i upgrade (not going to do that now) or ivy bridge, looks like ivy bridge is the one to shoot for but time is a factor, i only got the money around tax return time probably (hoping) for a possible upgrade. Not going with x79 thats too expensive for me im afraid.

 

[nikorr]

Just got 2600K 6weeks ago, didn't want to wait, good thing I got it.

 

[pttq]

[citation][nom]ikyung[/nom]Yeah, powerful mobile chips would be nice, but if I had to choose between horsepower and power efficiency for my mobile devices, I would definitely pick power efficiency. I would love for my laptop and smartphone to last me at least 16hours of heavy use.[/citation]
As long as performance is the same as SB and the power usage / heat is lower i'll be happy, which is most likely what it's going to be like.

 

[verbalizer]

Just got 2600K 6weeks ago, didn't want to wait, good thing I got it.

good move reporter....

 

[Guest]

jamesneed: Funny how it's always AMD's fault for everything AMD does, and when Intel has problems of it's own or fails to significantly improve on past products, it's also AMD's fault? I'm actually posting this from a Bulldozer machine, and at the risk of having an unpopular opinion, I'm going to come out and say that it's actually extremely fast, and multitasks better than any Intel quad. Really.

I think we've found an adequate explanation for a lot of this mindless trolling:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15869683

 

[Filiprino]

Xeon E5 moved to spring. Nice, pretty nice. First they were delayed to Q1, now it's Q2.
Well, I don't care, I don't have a real need for an upgrade so maybe I can wait until the end of 2013 with the launch of Haswell server parts.

 

[pttq]

[citation][nom]pttq[/nom]As long as performance is the same as SB and the power usage / heat is lower i'll be happy, which is most likely what it's going to be like.[/citation]
Ups was meant to quote Crazypcman.

 

[JeTJL]

As die shrinks happen it's expected to have a few manufacturing problems.

Not really interested in this stuff though, I'm planing on building a new system with either Intel's skylark or AMD's Excavator chips ~2 years from now.

 

[loubarouba]

[citation][nom]Filiprino[/nom]Well, I don't care, I don't have a real need for an upgrade so maybe I can wait until the end of 2013 with the launch of Haswell server parts.[/citation]

I'll be waiting for haswell as well, that and thunderbolt and hopefully some memristor implementation

 

[DroKing]

Intel still suck. LONG LIVE AMD. Id rather Phenom series over stupid i series by intel.

 

[A Bad Day]

Tinfoil hat on: Sabotage by both sides?...

 

[Filiprino]

[citation][nom]DroKing[/nom]Intel still suck. LONG LIVE AMD. Id rather Phenom series over stupid i series by intel.[/citation]
Hummmm... AMD sucks a bit for making such a thing as Bulldozer. And Intel is a bitch for delaying its new hardware.

 

[ta152h]

With Bulldozer still ramping up, a delay by Intel could be disastrous, especially if AMD releases a revision that increases clock speed/performance even more.

Even now, the performance of the Bulldozer has to be causing a loss of sleep at Intel. A quick revision by AMD could boost clock speeds a few hundred megahertz, which should be enough to exceed even the 486 in performance, on virtually all benchmarks with more than one thread running.