What is Intel doing?

What is intel doing?

I am utterly amused at what a company like intel is doing! Have a look:

1. What is their flagship platform for the P3? Obviously the 815. Now how can they promote a platform like 815 for the whole range of desktops to workstations and even servers which has a max memory limit of 512 MB!?
What other chipset/platform do they have for the mainstream PC that can access even a MB more than 512? I miss the BX chipset but it simply isnt today's chipset. I liked to call the 815 the SuperBX but as things stand, especially with the launch of WindowsXP most people will want to get more than half a GB RAM. And their intel board will miserably fail at it. Solution? Turn to VIA or SiS or Ali!

2. The are phasing out their best performing platform, the P3! Its totally insane, inexplicable, especially after they made a new model Tualatin for it with a number of enhancements like new 0.13u process, differential clock, larger cache (and of course, a new socket spec) that will enable it reach higher FSB, consume lower power and perform still better! They made just two models and then they say P3 will be phased out! With 1.2 GHz already working at 1600 overclocked, cant they see any potential still left in it?

3. Introducing SDRAM for a P4 was a joke on the people. Even worse than the s423->s478 shift. P4+SDRAM (worst is s423 P4 + SDRAM) simply isnt a platform. And then a consolation half a year later to support the DDR is not too great either. As if doing a favour to the customers, they are supporting the DDR-SDRAM on their next i845D chipset, but still limited to PC1600 when the world has already moved to PC2100, and fast adopting PC2700 and PC3200 proposed.

4. They have now introduced a value chipset - the i815EG for socket370 processors. Dont be mistaken, people thought 815 was the 810 with external AGP support. It in fact was true since nothing practically changed with the i815E chipset from the 810E2 except the AGP slot. <b>Beware of the i815EG</b>: It is a 815 chipset with just integrated graphics, no external AGP support but supporting Tualatins. Its in fact a B step i810E2! They obviously couldnt call it the i810E B0, its long dead. So if you think i815 = i810 + AGP, skip this chipset. I saw the Asus TUEG board, that looks the same PCB as the CUSL2-M except the AGP slot.

5. Today's P4 will be Celeron of tommorow! What a thought! Its a fact that traditionally Celeron has always lagged behind its big brother (PII or PIII) by exactly 33 MHz and half the cache (initial Celerons 266/300 MHz dint have any cache at all, later they came with 128k cache which was actually a quarter of the PII/PIII, but since Coppermine times PII itself came with half the cache of the Katmai) - now P4 is going 133 MHz FSB (533 effective) and 512k cache.

6. Next year you are in for a surprise! An integrated chipset for P4! Imagine what a P4 + SDRAM + int graphics do? P3 was by itself a very good peformer yet everybody saw what happened to it with the 810. Now P4, a lesser performer is paired with integrated graphics and SDRAM! Anybody could tell its chances.

This is not a troll, just to bring forth things known to everybody at one place. There are more, but just these many are enough to fire a hot discussion. I purposely did not write about AMD and P4 heating. These things arent supposed to be there in this thread, just your views on intel policies like above.



<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
23 answers Last reply
More about what intel doing
  1. btw, it turns out the i845D apparently <i>does</i> support PC2100...


    /me pours some gasoline, tosses a match, and starts singing "Burning ring o' fire" :wink:

    <A HREF="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/" target="_new">LFS</A>: "You don't eat or sleep or mow the lawn; you just hack your distro all day long."
  2. havent seen the docs yet, but probabely it will be unofficially supported, maybe overclocked! And Intel will certainly not make PC2100 boards.

    I heard even the regular i845 supported DDR, but that was undocumented and probably illegal to use. Comdex or some techfair had a 845 board with DDR support at least 4 months ago, and it certainly wasnt a engineering sample of the i845D! Had this report on Anandtech.

    Intel still needs to sell RDRAM!


    <font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
  3. poor, poor intel...what kind of plague hath bestowed upon their house?....

    I don't claim to know anything about everything, I just tell people what I know.
  4. My first opinion on Intel/Amd .

    Go out on the street, ask 100 people this question:
    Do you know your way around computers very well ?
    50 answer no !
    To those 50 that answered no, ask this question: Would you buy a Intel computer or an Amd computer system ?
    45 will say Intel !

    Now go back to the other 50, those that anwered yes to the first question. Now ask them them if they would buy a Intel or an Amd system !
    How will that percentage change ?

    I know the answer, do you !
    The reasons are hardder to pinpoint : marketing, loyalty,
    ignorance OPPS ! that slipped, i was doing so well there too.

    All the flames are on me folkes !
    My SPF 45 is ready (does it go up to 45 ?)

  5. I think they screwed up and lost a lot of credibility over the MTH /i820 debacle. Whether the market will forgive them for it remains to be seen...

    Did you know there never was there ever a cat so clever as magical Mr. Mistoffeles?
  6. Good stats, and almost everybody knows the answer.

    But the point is not what people think or what they know.

    The point is, what is intel doing? It certainly isnt doing the best for the consumers who are responsible their market position.

    Agreed, 45 out 50 will say intel, 25 out of the other 50 will say AMD.

    Once again, it seems Intel has more marketing peolpe than engineers, while AMD has exactly the opposite! They sell what they make. They dont need to make what people want!

    BTW frequent recalls on huge scales like the CC820+MTH or P-III 1.13G or PPros' certainly does some harm to the reliability, but actually blosters up its credibility - the company takes the responsibility for their mistakes.


    <font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
  7. Hi Girish,
    Once again, it seems Intel has more marketing peolpe than engineers, while AMD has exactly the opposite! They sell what they make. They dont need to make what people want
    What do you mean here? I don't seem to get the fact that AMD don't need to make what people want!!! Of course they need to make sure what people want otherwise no one will buy their processors.

    Also, Eventhough Intel has a excellent Marketing power, I think AMD would do the same think if it had the Marketing power. Why do you think AMD has adopted the PR rating instead of MHz. So when a user goes to the CompUSA and other stores they can look at the numbers and compare the price. You know AMD will do the same if AMD was the size of Intel.

  8. The 845M and 845D are gonna be bread and butter for Intel in 2002. I850 will still be top performer for socket 478 till June'ish

    I dont see I845 for SD around much longer.
  9. Well those numbers were in fact exactly what i had in mind.

    Now does this represent a bad thing ?

    Put yourself in the shoes of the average consumer ! We are talking here for example the home pc buyer, with limited background experience in pcs. What does he do ?

    Well, he follows the crowd ! I beleive it's is in our genes !
    Social behaviour, right ? 95% of the public can't be wrong, right ?

    Are these 95% of the public being mislead or taken advantage of ? That's the BIGGER question i would presume.
    And i feel no shame in admitting not to know the answer !

    AMD VS INTEL : They have both developped one of the most revolutionnary of products. No not the cpu. But rather the affordable cpu. HATS OFF TO BOTH !


    If in doubt, reformat. If unsure switch mobos for sure.
  10. Just to clear a few things up:
    - The i840 was the highend chipset for the PIII.
    - The i820 works fine if you don't use the MTH.
    - The Tualatin Celerons have 256k L2 cache, same as the desktop Tualatin PIII.

    - JW
  11. Um no the Tualatin has 512K L2.

    And you know, it is really weird what those guys are doing. It seems like when AMD releases something, it ain't rushed, it is quality, always better performing per clock (Duron beating P4?? True...) and rather always on time.
    Now I don't blame Intel for delaying the Northwood if it means better tweaking for better results, but damn it, what's next for Northwood? Support for PC66 RAM? An i845 Golden Edition? With all around RAM low-end RAM support for those who can't afford it? Especially with PC66 more expensive than RDRAM? Hehehehhe...
  12. the whole problem with DDR + P4 i blame on rambust.

    they wouldnt allow the selling of a ddr solution...

    so by the time the 845 with PC2100 DDR comes out the SiS 645 with PC2700 will be common.
    what would u prefer?

    and P4 + sdram + integrated is for the OEM busness... anything to get the costs down.
    shame they will still sell them advertised as 'fast and powerful'.

    Excuse me for a moment. I need to drive my ergonomic wheely chair over a sheet of bubble wrap!
  13. The PIII Tualatin desktop processors have 256k cache. The SMP capable server versions (Tualatin-S) have 512k cache.

    Celeron: 256k L2 w/latency of 1
    PIII Desktop: 256k L2 w/latency of 0
    PIII Server: 512k L2 w/latency of 0

    - JW
  14. whats the L1 cache on the new 0.13 micron celleries, p3's and p3-S?
    same as before? and what was it before lol

    Excuse me for a moment. I need to drive my ergonomic wheely chair over a sheet of bubble wrap!
  15. Same old 16k+16k I think

    - JW
  16. The C3 in it's last version, what is called 1 Ghz, has :
    L1 = 128
    L2 = 64
    I've been checking up on this little bugger .


    We all know what is up there in the sky, right !

    <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by pike on 12/03/01 11:07 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
  17. Yes, everybody needs to make what people what want. Even AMD, intel and for that matter other chipset vendors too.

    But going by the latest intel products, like the one I listed in my opening post, do they seem to really care for their consumers, the people who got them into the position they are now??

    I mean for a long time the intel flagship platform is the 815, and its getting away supporting only 512 MB of memory! Agreed, its a offshoot of the 810, the value chipset but then where is any higher end chipset? The 820/840? With supporting only RDRAM do they really qualify as desktop chipsets? Or do people have eother a value platform at less than 500 or a high end platform at more than 1000? What do they have for the majority of the people being in that 500~1000 segment?

    They are making use of their immense marketing power to sell what they have, not what the users need. The users need a good platform for their desktop systems. Forget DDR, even a SDRAM platform for P3 is crippled - 81x by 512 MB limit, the already phased out BX by AGP2X and ATA33. Where do users turn to then? VIA, SiS, ALi. Why cant intel make a good complete platform for their own chips? The P4? A average performing processor pushing down the unwary consumers' throats with dirt cheap SDRAM based solutions and making the P4 cheaper than P3. Isnt it a marketing ploy, a conspiracy?

    As a informed computer user, will you go for a P4+SDRAM, when you know it wont perform any better than a P-III running at 2/3 the MHz? Of course if the cost and your application justifies the performance requirement, then I would say you would be better off with a 1G Celeron with 815E integrated graphics board. If you are a serious performance freak you will certainly go for the P4 with RDRAM, or a P3 with SDRAM and a better chipset from ALi or VIA with a GB of memory. I think most will agree with me on this point.

    So now the question arises, isnt intel exploiting their brandname to sell underperforming equipment on a large scale by blinding the consumers by mere MHz figures? Who cares for performance?

    I again say:
    With the P4, Intel has proved that it is no necessary to improve the performance by increasing the MHz speed.
    Now with integrated graphics for P4 next year, Intel will once also show to the world that its possible to screw up the performance <i>even after</i> increasing the MHz!

    I guess it sums up pretty well!

    And this alone justifies AMD's strategy to name their processors by model numbers by relative P4 performance. Because the P4 has shattered the conception of <font color=red>MHz ~ Performance</font color=red> and has left it no meaning. So lets take P4 itself as a reference and name the procesors accordingly.


    <font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
  18. latency of 0? That's not even possible! You can never have a latency of 0... The latency of the L2 cache on tualatin and coppermine is 4 cycles. You have to add the L1 cache (a L1 cache miss) latency to this as well and you get a total latency of 7 cycles for a L2 cache hit.

    /* The more you know, the more you realize how little you know */
  19. Tualatin Celeron

    L1: 32K (16K for infrastructure and 16K for data)
    L2: 256k ECC


    - JW
  20. >> L1: 32K (16K for <b>infrastructure</b> and 16K for data)

    I dint know that the PIII had some infrastructure in it and that had 16k of cache!

    Read it a <b>instruction cache</b> or simply refer it to as <b>code cache</b> and you are done!

    Or call the PIII L1 cache as <b>split cache</b>! And yes, some time ago there used to be <b>unified cache</b>


    <font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
  21. Know what! I was interpreting C3 as Cyrix 3.
    Well, ok, the joke's on me, this time.

    Cyrix 3, who the hell wants to know anything about that
    underperforming, overestimated VIA offering, right !

    TO tell the truth it still interests me. There's somethimg
    very attractive (perhaps futuristic) about a true totally integrated economical mainboard. Perhaps when the cycle of R&D for mobos gets closer to that of seperate component cards, these integrated sys will become mainstreem. Even the faithfull DD could be replaced by those memory devices with no moving parts (forget the actual name, but one company had a 1 Gig product offering, expensive for now of course).
    All this integration on one mainboard must have the component board makers worrying, probably. But someone said it this tread "build what the consumer wants", and these would indeed seem the simplest solution for the consumer of the futur.


    When the Moon is full and bright, and the Stars shine, no that doesn't mean it's Miller time.
  22. "forget the actual name, but one company had a 1 Gig product offering"

    maybe you are referring to solid state drives. Yes, everyone in their right mind wishes they could afford some of these.
  23. >> But someone said it this tread "build what the consumer wants", and these would indeed seem the simplest solution for the consumer of the future.

    would anybody listen to this?

    <font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Chipsets Intel