<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15768" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15768</A>

Seems a bit specific for a made up rumour. I guess this is the end of netburst, and should probably can any hopes for even Prescott to become anything than the mediocre cpu it is now.

Question remaining is if and when Intel will have a 64 bit desktop part, and how on earth they are going to launch a Dothan based high performance (and 64 bit ?) part between now and 9-12 months ?

AMD fanboys should have a field day. Buy some AMD stock

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

For all the INQ bashers, here is the Reuter report:
<A HREF="http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;?type=technologyNews&storyID=5069113" target="_new">http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;?type=technologyNews&storyID=5069113</A>

Maybe its time to give the INQ and especially Magee and Groo's sources a bit of credit ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

BTX will not be dropped, it's just that future Intel processors will be based on Pentium-M and it's good for customers!

It's Intel going the AMD way... Better IPC, lower speed, lower power requirements.

--
Lookin' to fill that <font color=blue>GOD</font color=blue> shape hole!

BTX form factor have many advantages, like air flow and the ability to be very small.

At some time, you have to push for a new platform to have room to grow or have new possibilities. Compare this to car, manufacturers could always change suspension/engine/breaks and keep the same platform but at some point the new technology can't be efficient with an aging platform.

--
Lookin' to fill that <font color=blue>GOD</font color=blue> shape hole!

I don't there is real problem with this, because the Case/PSU cost is very low so when most people will upgrade from ATX to BTX they will only need to buy a Case/PSU + CPU/MB/RAM, this is no big deal!

And often, Case/PSU are the same price as PSU alone, so there is no point to not buy a Case when comes time to upgrade.

--
Lookin' to fill that <font color=blue>GOD</font color=blue> shape hole!

I agree with you, this is why I see no problem with BTX and there is no reason to worry/panic.

--
Lookin' to fill that <font color=blue>GOD</font color=blue> shape hole!

Um......

Intel is not going to fall apart overnight. It still is a company many times bigger than AMD, and their roadmaps and plans were too different from what physical realities allowed them to do. They're at the forefront of technological breakthroughs (90nm), and physics went another way than expected. Scientists learn. Mistakes are made and that is normal.

Now Intel is not the company to give us the over-the-top processor with full features, but their revamping the roadmaps and reallocating resources doesn't mean that "Intel was wrong" - even because this is impersonation. Intel is a company with scientists, researchers and engineers who went slightly off some physical realities that are just now being uncovered. It is conceivable that this was a scientific failure, but "Intel" and "AMD" aren't two persons that can be "right" or "wrong". These are flexible companies. AMD could wind up having the same problems as Intel in 90nm (not now, because they're aware that there are problems); it is a scientific problem. AMD is late in the transition to newer manufacturing techs if compared to Intel.

In any case, I'm pretty sure someone will think that I'm defending Intel. Well, no, I'm trying to convey the higher picture... Free of biases and passionate simplifications.

And I find Intel's response to be most interesting. We all know and respect P-M's (Banias) architecture, and I'm looking forward to seeing what Dothan is about. If it's big, then I'd say Intel might just improve desktop processors by a whole lot. They have to rush, though, or they'll continue behind the competition.

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>

All the last P7 are now dead.So P7 will live around 5 or 6 year about the same that P5.Personnaly i think is not the time for moving to a new architecture PCI-EX coming new case standart new RAM standart new socket new chipset.

Intel will lose market share on X86 if they dont come up with some thing soon.The worse that can happen if they lose by a good margin when longhorn will be release.Does someone know what happen with nephalem.

i need to change useur name.

>How come people only talk about half of the story? Intel is
>running full throttle towards two core

Cause we already knew that. And because I'm not convinced it will result in a better product than K8. A dual core Dothan, unless intel can magically cranck up the clock, will not be anywhere near a K8 in single threaded apps (which is still by far the majority today) nor FP intensive apps. Think games, it will suck balls at games, and basically every app where hyperthreading today doesnt provide a significant boost, which is like I said, most apps.

For well written multithreaded apps, a dual cored Dothan would probably be a nice chip, most likely outperforming a single core K8, probably even by a wide margin on some MT friendly apps. That is the good news for intel. The bad news is that a dual cored, "desktop optimized" (read higher clock higher fsb, therefore higher power) Dothan will not be that cool, nor that small, and by the time a dual cored Dothan hits the shelves, there will be dual cored K8's as well. Oops.

Now wether or not AMD will sell those as consumer chips, I don't know, but they sure could (or at least as a Athlon FX). And I really don't see how intel is going to release anythin that will hold a candle to a dual cored K8 in either single or multi threaded apps.


Oh, and lets not forget; afaik there is no 64 bit Dothan on the roadmaps even today. They may well be working on it, but it will most likely be much later than windows -64. Oops again.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

<A HREF="http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/040507/intel_processors_5.html" target="_new">http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/040507/intel_processors_5.html</A>

One snippet - "Employees who were working on Tejas, the code name for the canceled project, will be reassigned." It doesn't get much clearer than that.

I don't know, P4Man. I think that if they managed to tweak the core for clocks of 2.5-3Ghz and go for a full 533/667/800Mhz FSB, they might just manage to get a product out the door that's more than respectable. Also bear in mind that Banias is going to be an old reference on monday; we'll be seeing what Dothan is capable of on monday. If it shines, then Intel has its ticket to a great processor in the future.

If Dothan is indeed superior to Banias and they can crank two dothan cores on a processor by 2005, clock it above 2.5Ghz (which they'll probably try to do), increase FSB and deploy the 64-bit extensions in Dothan, then I don't think they're at all out of the game. Figure a 2.53Ghz dual-core Dothan with 533Mhz FSB... They'll probably try to increase FSB quickly, in order to match current dual-channel solutions' throughtput.

If they play their game fast, Intel could give us an impressive quantum device by 2005.

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>

i cant belive you think that it wasnt possible before hand to know what to expect? I mean its not like they went into a dark room and randomly put stuff together. The materials they are working with are known materials, they have properties and tolerances which can be extrapolated to come to a conclusion as to how it will perform.

Saying that thier excuse is ignorance is pretty sad seeing as though they knew it would come and the basic architecture is the same no matter how small you go, until the limit of the pyhsical materials. Id like to know hwo a company like intel would not have known there was a possibility of problems, if so then nto only did they waste development money, but they put blinders on to comapnies like ibm that were working on it as well. I just think surely they did a little homework.

I agree wiht you though that they could do nothing to change what was coming, but I was just saying one possibility was that they thought they could hold off the wall a bit longer.

Your right. P4 has ran it's course. Time for a new name.

> I think that if they managed to tweak the core for clocks
>of 2.5-3Ghz and go for a full 533/667/800Mhz FSB, they
>might just manage to get a product out the door that's more
>than respectable.

All depends on *when*. Its just not likely intel will be able to produce anything near those specs before halfway 2006 on 65nm, by which time 3+ GHz dual cored 90nm K8's will have been on the market for quite a while.

Also, don't forget dual core=2xTDP. Now with a 2 GHz Dothan that would be quite manageable (2 GHz Dothan is 34W I think ?). Now up the FSB to 800 MHz, increase vCore to achieve higher clocks, and skew the process towards higher clocks, and you're looking at 50+W easily. Now increase the clock by 50% (your claim, I don't believe it will clock anywhere near that high), and your back at 70-80W. Dual core of that ? No way.

>If Dothan is indeed superior to Banias

What I've heard, Dothan==Banias+2MB cache. Its a straight shrink, minor relayout, added cache. So yes it will be "superior" but not by much at all.

>and they can crank two dothan cores on a processor by 2005,
>clock it above 2.5Ghz (which they'll probably try to do),

No way, not on 90nm, and not at >2,5 GHz. It would be hotter than precott, and not even faster on single threaded apps.

> increase FSB

Thats a given.

>and deploy the 64-bit extensions in Dothan,

Ah.. thats the $1M question. Not this year IMHO, and not before the end of next year either.

>then I don't think they're at all out of the game.

Depends what game. High performance desktop chips, I don't think a dual core dothan will be competitive with 90nm K8's.. At least it will be mixed bag, maybe good on multithreaded apps, but it will suck balls on anything singlethreaded or FP intensive. Not too mention I expect it to be 32 bit only for quite some time.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

>I read it somewhere that dothan was supposed to deliver
>10-15% faster performance per clock than Banias

~10% sounds about right for the cache increase

>This would be putting the 2Ghz Dothan amongst the high-end
>products...

I wouldnt count on it. It will be a killer mobile chip, little doubt there, but against high end desktop chips, it won't be competitive. And that is against "old" 130 nm, single channel Athlon 64's running 32 bit software. Fast forward 6-9 months, and it will get ugly I think.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

If you like to use cheap PSU and Case then it will not cost you a lot. Most good ATX case have very good air flow. Why do we need a new stardard for PSU too? The BTX PSU offer better air flow too??

No one have think that intel can just go back to NW core.Intel just cannot go dual core banias they will lose too much on desktop.All ISV have compile there software for Netburst.Just think about 3D studio max lightwave or Doom 3 engine that use SSE2 and is multitread for HT.

Technologie wise SSE 3 and TNI wont have much sense if use on banias.Ht is also not support.SSE2 SSE are not super scalar so long pipeligne cpu will performe better.Prescott new branch prediction didicate shift rotate Imul larger write buffer can be use on NW core.All DDR-2 tech got some sense if use with netburst that is not much affect by latency unlike K8 P6.Larger cache have allwayse help more P7 that K7-8 or P6.Intel will lose if they flush P7.

i need to change useur name.

The fifth pentuim.

They should call it Pentium squared.

P²...

A long long time ago, but I can still remember, how that music used to make me smile... <A HREF="http://www.nexus.hu/zonix/DIGGER.MID" target="_new"><b><font color=blue>Digger rulz</font color=blue></b></A>

That, my friend is single core thinking. They have 3 X the time, as they have three teams working on it (Tejas, Tulsa and Jayhawk). The result may not be spectacular at release, but it will be "good enough", and will grow well.

SSE scale linear to clock speed Dothan core will never be close to P7 clock speed even lower to K8.Leaving intel with a lose situation there.In the middle of 2005 how many game and apps wont use SSE 1.


SSE 3 2 instruction were made to help HT they 9 others dont do much compare to SSE2.Tejas instruction was also made for a P7.

On standart X86 instruction and branch.2 alu vs 2 twin pump alu that reach 0.5 clock latency and reach very high clock speed.P6 have a bit faster FPU that P7 except that P7 reach much higher clock speed.

You can compare SPEC result for P4EE and Banias 1.7GHZ.There more that 50% difference with ICC.

HT vs dual core.Alpha team got the same question 7 year ago better to go with 2 small core or 1 big core.On a 8 alu 6 FPU risc 4 way SMT vs a 4*2 ALU 3*2 FPU.The big core have come to be faster in multitreads and single tread.Others limitation of dual core cache corenhency a level of cache must be share or interface before the FSB.AMD will go with a write back to others L2 from systemes request interface.(manage the HT link MCH and connect to the L2)Rumor say intel will go with a share L2 leaving to have to rework all the L2 cache that will be to long.So in the real world .......
2 core that push about 32 bit of data per cycle to write back
Each 3 cycle a L1 miss will occur
Writing new data from memory


ALL this work for what 2 year before nephalem show it face that feature a multi core SMT high single tread performance.
Just be realistic a bit USA R&D have a lot of probleme after merced Prescott.What intel will with them.They should do like ATI just go back to the basic Gefore 2 Radeon 9700 Radeon X800 Itanium 2 K8 NW.Just work on Basic thing.Go back to a 90NM 1 MB NW that can scale up to 4.4 GHZ will do the job that can be ready in 6 month and in a 1 and half add what go thing you have do with prescott and tejas and 64 Bit mode.That for desktop part on a DP and others P7 will not hold the candle vs K8.Either intel push itanium as fast as they can (impossible anyway) or call for a miracle.

i need to change useur name.

It would seem so. However, I still have to stress that that review is very badly representative of Dothan's performance. They should have used more benchmarks that stress the actual CPU. I mean, it is completely pointless to say "oh my, they have the same memory performance", since they use the same type of memory and same chipset. Or even to say "A 1.7Ghz Banias is as good as a 2Ghz Dothan in games!" - these benchmarks were obviously video-card stressing. The CPU has little to do with that.

Granted, I was too optimistic. But THG's review is as bad as it gets.

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>