Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Conroe Release date pushed back to 27th july

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a c 471 à CPUs
June 29, 2006 4:19:16 PM

If true then I'll be a little disappointed. Hopefully another site like DailyTech will have a similar article, but shed some light as to why.

Logistics problem?
Lower than expected yields?
.
.
.
etc...
June 29, 2006 4:54:22 PM

i've never heard of hkepc.com, so i'd wait for some more known site to post an article...

if its true, then AMD fanboys are going to have a feild day making up some stoopid bullshit...
Related resources
June 29, 2006 5:13:10 PM

They are a cutting edge reputable site, with a forefinger on the pulse of the tech industry...
June 29, 2006 5:19:15 PM

Actually, Intel is set to release a brand new Celeron D chip based on Netburst.
June 29, 2006 5:32:04 PM

Quote:
Actually, Intel is set to release a brand new Celeron D chip based on Netburst.


So, what's your spin on it? Let me guess.... It will consume 1200W of power, perform worse than some chip AMD made in 1995, will have 1MHz FSB, cause lots of BSODs, and will cause any computer to have it to explode.
June 29, 2006 5:34:40 PM

I thought everyone agreed netburst was not only horrible but also now obsolete I dont get the thinking behind releasing a new Pentium D so near the launch of conroe I mean who in their right minds would buy that
June 29, 2006 5:35:45 PM

Quote:
Actually, Intel is set to release a brand new Celeron D chip based on Netburst.


So, what's your spin on it? Let me guess.... It will consume 1200W of power, perform worse than some chip AMD made in 1995, will have 1MHz FSB, cause lots of BSODs, and will cause any computer to have it to explode.

Well, I didn't say that. But on second thought, explosion of Intel PCes is a well known possibility. Google "Intel laptop explosion" and see for yourself.
June 29, 2006 5:40:43 PM

Quote:
Well, I didn't say that. But on second thought, explosion of Intel PCes is a well known possibility. Google "Intel laptop explosion" and see for yourself.


Do you honestly think that it had anything to do with it being an Intel based laptop? It was much more likely a battery issue(Dell) than a cpu or chipset problem.
June 29, 2006 5:44:02 PM

It seems like a rather odd thing to do as according to Intel they have been pumping out core2's for a while to ensure a good supply. It's also not like they are waiting for mobo manufacturers to provide boards for it. It seems to run fine on a selection of current boards. :?

Not a dig Im just a little concerned about availability as im eager to get my hands on a E6600.
June 29, 2006 5:55:19 PM

Quote:
Well, I didn't say that. But on second thought, explosion of Intel PCes is a well known possibility. Google "Intel laptop explosion" and see for yourself.


Do you honestly think that it had anything to do with it being an Intel based laptop? It was much more likely a battery issue(Dell) than a cpu or chipset problem.

Don't argue with idiots. They will lower you to their level and then beat you with experience.

Not my line, a direct copy from a signature of some member at XS... But this is quite apt in this case... :D 
June 29, 2006 5:57:32 PM

Quote:
If true then I'll be a little disappointed. Hopefully another site like DailyTech will have a similar article, but shed some light as to why.

Logistics problem?
Lower than expected yields?
.
.
.
etc...


I have a feeling it's to ensure that they have sufficient stock of all levels before releasing. Much more impact if they delay a month or two and have the supply to meet the demand than to release before their ready and have widespread media coverage of shortages.

Also, note that I am not an Intel fanboy, I love my current AMD rig, I just love whatever's best at the time. Looks like for the next year or so, intel's back.
June 29, 2006 6:06:38 PM

Quote:
I thought everyone agreed netburst was not only horrible but also now obsolete I dont get the thinking behind releasing a new Pentium D so near the launch of conroe I mean who in their right minds would buy that

Its probably just the last project that's getting out of the door. They probably just want to finish up on this processor in the product cycle. It just won't sell that well w/ conroe coming in. Shrug, that's the only reason I can see for them to launch a P-D - it was done, might as well just launch it.

As for conroe being pushed... its only 4 days. Maybe they just didn't want to launch on a Friday when everyone's going home. :p 
June 29, 2006 6:14:01 PM

I would guess that they are going to deliever the processors and the announce them so when it's official you can go buy one with out waiting. Since the AM2 release had about 4 days from release to availabitlity in stores, Intel may just want to have it all done at the same time.
June 29, 2006 6:23:50 PM

I don't see the big news here. Thats not a big push back for new technology. I was expecting Intel to push it back a couple months.
June 29, 2006 6:37:03 PM

Quote:
I don't see the big news here. Thats not a big push back for new technology. I was expecting Intel to push it back a couple months.



The big news is that well this is the best thing to happen to cpu's since amd's athlons and i'm sure no one wants it delayed, even if it is just for 4 days or 4 months
June 29, 2006 6:46:52 PM

As I expect, it is continueing to play out as if Conroe will be a high end chip that will be in low volumes for several months with netburst products continueing to make up the vast majority of new Intel desktop and laptop chips, even well into 2007.

It will be interesting to see how accessible Conroe products will be after its official release.

Woodcrest is obviously Intel's ramping priority, so it is to their financial benefit to advertise Conroe while actually producing Woodcrest as fast a they can to replace those old netburst Xeons as fast as possible.
June 29, 2006 6:55:16 PM

Quote:

Woodcrest is obviously Intel's ramping priority, so it is to their financial benefit to advertise Conroe while actually producing Woodcrest as fast a they can to replace those old netburst Xeons as fast as possible.


Intel is definitely paper launching here. The whole server market is only 1.5 million units per quarter, and Intel can't provide 3 days of supply on launch. You will be lucky if you can see a Conroe in 3 months.
June 29, 2006 7:11:23 PM

While it may seem bad that websites don't appear to have Woodcrest in stock that really isn't indicative of a bad launch when you are talking server products. It's doubtful that most medium-large business would go to Newegg or froogle.com as your blog seems to indicate and pick up parts to put together their own systems. More likely than not, you'd contact your personal Dell representative that handles your company's file and discuss a mass order. Big orders don't happen next-business day so Dell's July 17 ship date for Woodcrest systems self-ordered online isn't really as bad as it seems.

Supermicro also quotes immediate availability of Woodcrest systems. Whether that's true or not I don't know, but that's what they are marketing.

http://www.digit-life.com/news.html?06/36/14#63614
June 29, 2006 7:24:59 PM

Quote:
And why are the releasing new pentium d chips

The new Pentium D chips are the 915D, 925D, and 945D which are chips without VT and are going to be offered at low prices, again part of their dual core to the masses strategy. It's obviously an inventory clearing procedure as well. AMD is dropping the prices of the X2 3800+ and introducing a new X2 3600+ to counter this. The new Pentium Ds are also on a newer D0 stepping with the 960D dropping to a 95W TDP to offer better power characteristics. I doubt Intel actually put much effort into this, since it's just a by-product of the maturing 65nm process. Intel is also required to continue supporting Netburst processors since they are part of the current SIPP program which corporations use to standardize their computer systems that they order in bulk. I don't think anyone can complain when Intel continues to improve their older technology.

For the Conroe launch delay itself, it really isn't indicative of any problems with the processor. Intel has 3 65nm fabs producing Core 2s now and previous indications are that stocks are good (of Conroes at least). Besides, a 4 day delay (the original launch was July 23) wouldn't be to increase supply anyways. The delay was probably partly to separate it's launch from that of the refreshed Netbursts that are launching on July 23 to provent too many associations. The 2nd reason has been reported before, and that is that while Conroe availability seems to be good G965 and probably Q965 availability is slower. That's to be expected since chipset production is just switching to 90nm to more tweaking and ramping needs to take place, and with 8 unified shaders in the GMA X3000 and GMA 3000 the IGP dies would be massive which again means slower ramps due to yielding. The P965 doesn't have the same problem and was launched already because it doesn't include the IGP. The 4 day delay would probably be to get the G965 and Q965 ducks lined up properly and probably to finish details on the vPro platform.
June 29, 2006 9:33:23 PM

Quote:

Woodcrest is obviously Intel's ramping priority, so it is to their financial benefit to advertise Conroe while actually producing Woodcrest as fast a they can to replace those old netburst Xeons as fast as possible.


Intel is definitely paper launching here. The whole server market is only 1.5 million units per quarter, and Intel can't provide 3 days of supply on launch. You will be lucky if you can see a Conroe in 3 months.

Maybe, but I am sure there will certainly be more Conroes around by July end than energy efficient X2s... By the way, how many 35W 3800s did AMD release? A dozen?
June 29, 2006 9:56:11 PM

Quote:

Not a dig Im just a little concerned about availability as im eager to get my hands on a E6600.



I was firs, that 6600 is mine...my precious. lol :wink:
June 29, 2006 10:02:29 PM

Quote:
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=622630&starttim...


Dunno what to make of it
And why are the releasing new pentium d chips :?: 8O




I heard this a few weeks ago I was curious if it was true.

intel will be able to lower the price on those chips even more, im shoor there are many companies that will use them, as lo level, power consuming computers, looking at this globaly, there are many other countries in which geting a pc at all is hard(because of the price), this will alow some oem's to produce low level very cheap pc's,
haveny u guyz/gals heard about that program " a pc for $100" i think it was started by one of the universities.
June 29, 2006 10:02:34 PM

Quote:
Actually, Intel is set to release a brand new Celeron D chip based on Netburst.


So, what's your spin on it? Let me guess.... It will consume 1200W of power, perform worse than some chip AMD made in 1995, will have 1MHz FSB, cause lots of BSODs, and will cause any computer to have it to explode.

Well, I didn't say that. But on second thought, explosion of Intel PCes is a well known possibility. Google "Intel laptop explosion" and see for yourself.
Right, Intel processors just suddenly explode. Wait a minute...
You used this as proof! And you even defended its results!
So Woodcrest is a paper launch. We shouldn't be surprised - it seems like it ends up this way for everything.
June 29, 2006 10:16:10 PM

Quote:
i've never heard of hkepc.com, so i'd wait for some more known site to post an article...

if its true, then AMD fanboys are going to have a feild day making up some stoopid bullshit...
HKEPC is a Hong Kong website, and seem to be in the know....well ahead of american websites. I think they can be trusted.
June 29, 2006 10:24:47 PM

I don't think there is really anything to be made from it. As for the Pentium D's, Intel is striving to remove single cores from the market, and they are succeeding:
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/06/29/gateway_dual_core_computers/
With the exception of eMachines and one ultra-portable laptop, Gateway has completely eliminated single-core CPU's from their inventory.

For everyone waiting for a Conroe, its been delayed...by four days. There are other things beside Conroe, and it doesn't hurt to be patient. I, with my POS rig, could wait till K8L and still be fine.
June 29, 2006 10:28:19 PM

Quote:

Woodcrest is obviously Intel's ramping priority, so it is to their financial benefit to advertise Conroe while actually producing Woodcrest as fast a they can to replace those old netburst Xeons as fast as possible.


Intel is definitely paper launching here. The whole server market is only 1.5 million units per quarter, and Intel can't provide 3 days of supply on launch. You will be lucky if you can see a Conroe in 3 months.
So you are saying Intel can't produce more than 50K Woodcrest CPU's a month?
June 29, 2006 10:47:07 PM

Quote:

Woodcrest is obviously Intel's ramping priority, so it is to their financial benefit to advertise Conroe while actually producing Woodcrest as fast a they can to replace those old netburst Xeons as fast as possible.


Intel is definitely paper launching here. The whole server market is only 1.5 million units per quarter, and Intel can't provide 3 days of supply on launch. You will be lucky if you can see a Conroe in 3 months.
So you are saying Intel can't produce more than 50K Woodcrest CPU's a month?

I bet Intel is shipping Woodcrest off their development FABs, if they need to burn 3 wafers to get a working Woody, I won't be surprised. It takes a long time for them to get their so called copy-exact working in another FAB. All signs indicate Woody was a vaporware. DELL may have a few parts (shipping date is unclear from their site), but from the channel checks, the earliest ETA date I see was on GamePC.com, which was July 31. All others listed ETA of somewhere in August.

Also, judging from the fact the Woodcrest starts from a low clock speed of 1.6GHZ, it seems that the bin split is really bad.
June 29, 2006 10:50:59 PM

Quote:

Woodcrest is obviously Intel's ramping priority, so it is to their financial benefit to advertise Conroe while actually producing Woodcrest as fast a they can to replace those old netburst Xeons as fast as possible.


Intel is definitely paper launching here. The whole server market is only 1.5 million units per quarter, and Intel can't provide 3 days of supply on launch. You will be lucky if you can see a Conroe in 3 months.
So you are saying Intel can't produce more than 50K Woodcrest CPU's a month?

I bet Intel is shipping Woodcrest off their development FABs, if they need to burn 3 wafers to get a working Woody, I won't be surprised. It takes a long time for them to get their so called copy-exact working in another FAB. All signs indicate Woody was a vaporware. DELL may have a few parts (shipping date is unclear from their site), but from the channel checks, the earliest ETA date I see was on GamePC.com, which was July 31. All others listed ETA of somewhere in August.

Also, judging from the fact the Woodcrest starts from a low clock speed of 1.6GHZ, it seems that the bin split is really bad.zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

* deaming that i hear about a FUD spinner *
June 29, 2006 10:57:56 PM

Quote:

Woodcrest is obviously Intel's ramping priority, so it is to their financial benefit to advertise Conroe while actually producing Woodcrest as fast a they can to replace those old netburst Xeons as fast as possible.


Intel is definitely paper launching here. The whole server market is only 1.5 million units per quarter, and Intel can't provide 3 days of supply on launch. You will be lucky if you can see a Conroe in 3 months.
So you are saying Intel can't produce more than 50K Woodcrest CPU's a month?

I bet Intel is shipping Woodcrest off their development FABs, if they need to burn 3 wafers to get a working Woody, I won't be surprised. It takes a long time for them to get their so called copy-exact working in another FAB. All signs indicate Woody was a vaporware. DELL may have a few parts (shipping date is unclear from their site), but from the channel checks, the earliest ETA date I see was on GamePC.com, which was July 31. All others listed ETA of somewhere in August.

Also, judging from the fact the Woodcrest starts from a low clock speed of 1.6GHZ, it seems that the bin split is really bad.

You are so off target it is amazing. I just don't understand why people like you enjoy making up lies about a company? What in the world do you have to gain by spreading BS that you obviously know nothing about?

It is sad really.
June 29, 2006 10:58:04 PM

Quote:
Actually, Intel is set to release a brand new Celeron D chip based on Netburst.


So, what's your spin on it? Let me guess.... It will consume 1200W of power, perform worse than some chip AMD made in 1995, will have 1MHz FSB, cause lots of BSODs, and will cause any computer to have it to explode.

Well, I didn't say that. But on second thought, explosion of Intel PCes is a well known possibility. Google "Intel laptop explosion" and see for yourself.
Right, Intel processors just suddenly explode. Wait a minute...
You used this as proof! And you even defended its results!
So Woodcrest is a paper launch. We shouldn't be surprised - it seems like it ends up this way for everything.

ROFL..
yea that's exactly what happens when you take the heatsink off and light a firecracker underneath it... :roll:
June 29, 2006 10:59:30 PM

Quote:
Actually, Intel is set to release a brand new Celeron D chip based on Netburst.


So, what's your spin on it? Let me guess.... It will consume 1200W of power, perform worse than some chip AMD made in 1995, will have 1MHz FSB, cause lots of BSODs, and will cause any computer to have it to explode.

Well, I didn't say that. But on second thought, explosion of Intel PCes is a well known possibility. Google "Intel laptop explosion" and see for yourself.

Looks like your best source for spin just cut your legs from under you.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32723

Care to rethink your arguement?
June 29, 2006 11:00:13 PM

Quote:
They are a cutting edge reputable site, with a forefinger on the pulse of the tech industry...


Where does the forefinger go when the tech industry is constipated?
June 29, 2006 11:02:21 PM

Quote:

Woodcrest is obviously Intel's ramping priority, so it is to their financial benefit to advertise Conroe while actually producing Woodcrest as fast a they can to replace those old netburst Xeons as fast as possible.


Intel is definitely paper launching here. The whole server market is only 1.5 million units per quarter, and Intel can't provide 3 days of supply on launch. You will be lucky if you can see a Conroe in 3 months.
So you are saying Intel can't produce more than 50K Woodcrest CPU's a month?

I bet Intel is shipping Woodcrest off their development FABs, if they need to burn 3 wafers to get a working Woody, I won't be surprised. It takes a long time for them to get their so called copy-exact working in another FAB. All signs indicate Woody was a vaporware. DELL may have a few parts (shipping date is unclear from their site), but from the channel checks, the earliest ETA date I see was on GamePC.com, which was July 31. All others listed ETA of somewhere in August.

Also, judging from the fact the Woodcrest starts from a low clock speed of 1.6GHZ, it seems that the bin split is really bad.

That would be illogical for them to do so, if the process would be that bad, they would delay, since i doubt they'd want egg on their face, i think AMD gave them enough of a beating in the Server/workstation space to last them for the next 3-5 years. (until they get complacent again..)

Intel has too much riding on Xeon woodcrest being the Xeon P4 replacement and AMD beater to pull games like that. :)  lol

Then again, knowing a company like ENRON pulled the stuff they did… who knows.
June 29, 2006 11:06:55 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that just four days?
June 29, 2006 11:07:32 PM

Quote:
It takes a long time for them to get their so called copy-exact working in another FAB.


Copy Exact may be an intensive process that takes time, but my limited experience participating in a couple of white papers showed it to be extremely efficient and fluid. No false starts, no misfires. Everything came up to spec right on schedule. The Intel people I interacted with claimed that they knew it HAD to happen that way, every time.
a b à CPUs
June 29, 2006 11:08:06 PM

Quote:
this is the bigest launch in intel history they are not going to delay it and it wont be paper. they have been making conroe for months


ROFL. Ever bother reading TOMS HARDWARE? It's a paper launch. As Intel has said before and posted by sites like TOMS Hardware, limited cpus this year, the REAL launch date is next year. Only a few very lucky peeps will get one of the cpus this year...
June 29, 2006 11:08:13 PM

Quote:
Actually, Intel is set to release a brand new Celeron D chip based on Netburst.


So, what's your spin on it? Let me guess.... It will consume 1200W of power, perform worse than some chip AMD made in 1995, will have 1MHz FSB, cause lots of BSODs, and will cause any computer to have it to explode.

Well, I didn't say that. But on second thought, explosion of Intel PCes is a well known possibility. Google "Intel laptop explosion" and see for yourself.

Looks like your best source for spin just cut your legs from under you.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32723

Care to rethink your arguement?

Oh the ownage!
June 29, 2006 11:11:00 PM

Quote:
Also, judging from the fact the Woodcrest starts from a low clock speed of 1.6GHZ, it seems that the bin split is really bad.


Or maybe they want to cover the entire market? Nah.
June 29, 2006 11:23:08 PM

4 days in the difference not a big deal at all, to me anyway. Who posted blaming intel for that exploding computer ?, the only parts in a computer which have the potential to explode are the battery, hdd (which would never happen) and optical drives which cds have occasionally exploded in them causing no outter damage. A cpu is not going to explode, under any circumstance.
June 29, 2006 11:43:25 PM

Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that just four days?


EXACTLY!!!!!!!!

People are talking like 4 days will give Intel time to make a new batch of cpus.

Nothing production related is affecting the change in launch date, It was more likely than not a simple change in marketing strategy, moving it from a sunday when everyone is home relaxing, to a thursday when ppl are alot more able to take in new developments, and its closer to the end of quarter which may allow them to reassure the market when they make their earnings/revenue guidance for the next quarter.

Believe me ppl, being emplyed by a multi billion dollar multinational, i can tell you they woudl have consulted a panel of consumer phsychologists on the impact of the 4 day move. and i for one dont feel threatened by having to wait from sunday to thursday for a cpu i'll be using for the next 2 years.
June 29, 2006 11:46:15 PM

Shakira!!!!!!!!! ...........can i get your autograph, i'll sell it to buy a conroe
June 29, 2006 11:47:32 PM

I like to see proof that an Intel laptop has a higher chance of exploding than an AMD laptop.. if i'm not mistaken Intel has a huge lead over AMD in that department, so why are people still buying it even if it explodes?
June 29, 2006 11:54:20 PM

Quote:

Woodcrest is obviously Intel's ramping priority, so it is to their financial benefit to advertise Conroe while actually producing Woodcrest as fast a they can to replace those old netburst Xeons as fast as possible.


Intel is definitely paper launching here. The whole server market is only 1.5 million units per quarter, and Intel can't provide 3 days of supply on launch. You will be lucky if you can see a Conroe in 3 months.
So you are saying Intel can't produce more than 50K Woodcrest CPU's a month?

I bet Intel is shipping Woodcrest off their development FABs, if they need to burn 3 wafers to get a working Woody, I won't be surprised. It takes a long time for them to get their so called copy-exact working in another FAB. All signs indicate Woody was a vaporware. DELL may have a few parts (shipping date is unclear from their site), but from the channel checks, the earliest ETA date I see was on GamePC.com, which was July 31. All others listed ETA of somewhere in August.

Also, judging from the fact the Woodcrest starts from a low clock speed of 1.6GHZ, it seems that the bin split is really bad.

I'm usually not one to say something like this

Moo.
STFU You Inbred Fucking Retarded Ass Clown!
June 29, 2006 11:55:58 PM

I have to say 4 days is not going to bother me. My question is this though, how does this effect the new Core 2 MB's and their release. Correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the impression that Asus' 965 board was set to appear tomorrow. Can anyone speculate on when we will see these boards appear on the market?
June 29, 2006 11:58:22 PM

Quote:
I have to say 4 days is not going to bother me. My question is this though, how does this effect the new Core 2 MB's and their release. Correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the impression that Asus' 965 board was set to appear tomorrow. Can anyone speculate on when we will see these boards appear on the market?


I heard July 4th, at least the gigabyte ad on the THG homepage says so
June 30, 2006 12:48:33 AM

Yeah i hope the MB's come out 2-4 weeks early so maybe people can test and give us some feedback on which one is a dog and which one actually is worth $$$
June 30, 2006 2:23:16 AM

Yeah... 4 days will not bother me... i really don't know when the 965 is going to come out but I'm waiting for the nForce 570 sli... do you know when it is going to come out?
!