Came across this on Engadget today, looks as if Intel could well be releasing Sandy this year afterall. Great news if so, looks like i could have a new built pc in time for christmas :)
Engadget link
Came across this on Engadget today, looks as if Intel could well be releasing Sandy this year afterall. Great news if so, looks like i could have a new built pc in time for christmas :)
Engadget link
Interesting. Maybe we'll have a short period of LGA1155 fun if the CPUs clock to the moon :up:
the reason why intel had great earnings is because they are maximizing 32nm's profitability by selling for premium prices. they dont really need to launch sandy bridge because they are on their own schedule, not the market's.
Not surprising, like Chum said, it's all about market dynamics now, the product has been ready for some time.
This is total garbage, Engadget are completely misinterpreting the earnings CC comments.
I mean, look at the title, even, "to tape out ahead of schedule". :rofl:
SB was always going to ship for revenue in Q4, with product launches in Q1.
Intel said SB has been getting a great reception (customers like the samples), so they are adding 32nm capacity, in order to be able to ramp them faster.
Intel DID NOT SAY it is "way ahead of schedule", or make any other comment implying products would launch sooner. They simply confirmed what they've been saying all along: SB shipments for revenue late this year.
Remember, Intel has also said OEMs much prefer January launches to Q4 launches.
CC comments:
I want to mention our upcoming product family codenamed Sandy Bridge. Last quarter I mentioned that we were broadly sampling this product to our customers. I’m more excited about Sandy Bridge than I have been on any product that the company has launched in a number of years.
Due to the very strong reception of Sandy Bridge, we have accelerated our 32nm factory ramp, and have raised our CapEx guidance to enable us to meet the anticipated demand. We look forward to seeing many of you at our September IDF Conference in San Francisco, where we will share more details about this new architecture.
----------
David Wong – Wells Fargo
Thank you very much. Paul, you mentioned that you are very excited about Sandy Bridge and this was one of the reasons for accelerating 32 nm, does this mean that you are planning to bring out Sandy Bridge earlier than scheduled, and when might we expect to see first launches of systems that have Sandy Bridge in them?
Paul Otellini
Well, we will talk more about the product in a lot of detail at IDF in a couple of months. In terms of product granularity, I really don’t want to get more granular than we have been which is that we will ship Sandy Bridge for revenue this year, late this year.
David Wong – Wells Fargo
Great, thanks. And further on the CapEx question, and when you have higher CapEx this year, does that represent a pull in from 2011, reducing what might otherwise have been spent in 2011, or is it just extra spending?
Stacy Smith
Yes, that is the right way to think about it, although we haven’t put a forecast out for 2011 yet. So, we don’t know how to do the plus or minus to that, but to just piggyback on what Paul said, based on what we are hearing on Sandy Bridge, we are now anticipating a faster ramp of the product, so some of the capital that I thought we could spend in the first half of next year, we’re going to put in place now so that we can ramp the product out of the shoot faster than we anticipated. So, it should be plus this year and a bit of minus to next year.
nice, but I dont care about quads, just give me my octo-core as soon as possible :D
The high-end desktop & server stuff is mid-2011. Hopefully we get some good stuff on those @ IDF, September 13-15. And maybe one of those "Hello, my name is IvyBridge" demos. Probably too early for "Hello, my name is Haswell." :)Quote:
Originally Posted by -Sweeper_
Sandy bridge is on track it will not be super early or late.
Hey, did you get one of the enthusiast octo-core SB samples yet?Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
Too true, too true, especially the i3 and i5 dual cores are horribly overpriced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
Yes the i3s are so horrible overpriced that they are and where cheaper then E7xxx dualcores at release... :rolleyes:
I thought it was because they agreed to stop trying to get into price wars with AMD as it was really damaging having a performance lead AND constantly lowering prices just to stop AMD making any profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chumbucket843
Phenom 2 x4 965BE 145£Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
I5 750 150£
I5 650 150£
Athlon 2 x4 640 105£
I3 530 100£
Phenom 2 x6 1055T 160£
I5 661 170£
I don't see how anyone could not consider the 32nm dual cores overpriced.
For some people AMD doesn't ever enter the equation, so they only compare prices to other Intel models. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by naokaji
I am one of those people. I've owned multiple AMD computers in the last 15 years. I was disappointed with every single one. I do not even consider AMDs unless I'm looking at power usage solely and don't care about performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMojoZ
I don't recommend AMDs to others, but I have no qualms about anyone else buying them. I just won't...
My next upgrade from 45nm Harpertown is the 22nm stuff.
¿Have you tried any K7/XP/A64/X2 in the pentium III/4/D era? By no means you can be dissapointed unless you always bought ultra-cheap(pcchips) motherboards and expect them to perform like high end ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by josh1980
Similar to saying being dissapointed with a radeon 9800 vs geforce FX5000 or HD2900 vs GTX8800.
Maybe prior to 1999 with a minority of motherboards(mostly low quality) for the K6-2. That could be a reason to be dissapointed.
Abit NF7-S 2.0 nuff said (i think thats the right one, i have to get mine out of the shed)
My first was a 486dx2-66 that was slower than my 486dx2-50.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nintendork
Then I gave them a change with a K6-2 450 that should have been faster than my p2-200. With the exact same video card(I took it out of my computer and with me on vacation!), more ram than my desktop at home, and Everquest was unplayable. I was furious because I had just bought the computer and it was a POC.
Next I tried a 1Ghz AMD athlon(????). It was crap compared to my Intel p3 850mhz.
Then, most recently and regretably I tried an athlon x2 laptop. I was told that they had been doing much better after supposedly beating Intel's performance on the p4s. I had seen the benchmarks that AMD was even or superior on benchmarks but my friends always wondered why my p4s would boot up and play games better than their (what should have been superior) computers. Anyway, I wanted to be able to watch videos when traveling and it should have been able to cut the mustard. Instead, when I unplugged it I couldn't watch the 720p videos I had. I was so pissed off because I had spent $1200 on that laptop and it couldn't server the ONE purpose I had for it. The problem was as soon as you unplugged it, the CPU immediately clocked itself to the lowest frequency and locked itself there.
I called HP and they said that AMD's laptop line does that for battery life. I swore on that day I'd NEVER EVER EVER buy AMD again if I had any kind of performance based expectation. If/when AMD gives me a computer, I'll CONSIDER giving them another chance. Until then, I've soaked $3k+ over the last 10+ years and every time the computer would be less than a week old and was worthless to me. As for that laptop I paid 1200 for, I gave it away for $250 a month later because I couldn't stand to have it in my house it disgusted me so much.
Not to sound offensive but I've had quite a few people I work with ask the same question(you tried this line, that line, etc.). I have never bought an AMD and been happy with it.
I have a dark dark history with AMD, and I won't use them. I will recommend people don't buy AMD. But I will admit if I wasn't a power user and gamer I might have a different opinion of them. They do function, albeit in a limited manner for me, and have never, not even once, been able to perform the one task I intended them to be used for.
Despite the flame wars between Intel and AMD fanboys I am glad AMD is doing well. I'd prefer Intel have competition, I'd prefer the AMD employees stay employed because they won't stay employed from my product purchases.
I am looking at buying one of those "overpriced" dual core processors. And I know that when I buy it, it will do exactly what I need it to do at the minimum. I won't consider AMD because I have no intention of being disappointed yet again by (imo) a substandard product. :)
PLEASE don't start an Intel/AMD flamewar in this thread. I'm just trying to explain my position :).
Cheers!
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh1980
Your sig is very ironic , you blaming AMD for something that you should have taken responsibly for ... Your post is nothing but fud.All you have to do is enable performance mode in wista/win7 power management and you mobile processor will clock up to full speed, regardless of power source.
I am not too exited about SB myself :shrug: , but time will tell what performance improvement it will bring.And it will be a "Tock" , tocks are usually good :)
PS:tick-tock.
i want to know TDP that is pretty much it. what is the TDP of the enthusiast class desktop?
In my time using computers (first one was a compaq "portable" 8088), and from life in general, I have learned that any company can let you down. Intel let me down with P4 and AMD let me down with K10. Companies, like the people in them, change. I'm hoping for great things from both companies this next year, but I won't be too shocked if either one doesn't deliver.Quote:
Originally Posted by josh1980
I did accept responsibility for my purchases. I didn't take them back to the store like alot of people might.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~CS~
I did. The CPU still clocked down, only then it would jump back and forth between full speed and idle, still causing jumps in the video that made it impossible to watch.
Excuse me ~CS~ but I don't consider it FUD when these are my experiences. If you want to disagree that's fine. But basically calling me a liar is over the top considering I tried to make it clear I didn't want a flamewar starting. I don't get involved in flamewars and I will NOT respond to any more comments from you.
Although some Intel processor are overpriced, alot of AMD processors are underpriced considering the cost and size for AMD.
Its unreasonable to expect intel to pull a suicide dive and lower their prices. Not only would it be less profitable for Intel, it would squeeze AMD margins even thinner to the point they would go bankrupt.
For the most part, Intels prices are at the very least, competitive with AMD considering AMDs performance in most situations.
All of Intel's last tick-tocks have been nothing but pleasant since Core 2 Duo emerged.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~CS~
Intel is keeping its very strong strategy on technology launch, nice.
perhaps you have to invest some more time in reviewing parts before you buy, to me it seems you buy the wrong parts for the wrong purpose at the wrong timeframes. I am sure you have loved your netburst parts more :DQuote:
Originally Posted by josh1980
Pretty sure its still in the 130W region, as always.Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
I've also tossed the I5 750 in the mix which gives you double the cores for a clockrate drop at dual core price.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMojoZ
I can build a cheap ass rig for $400, dont see how their over priced..Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
well if you believe fudzilla's report:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
It's 95W/65W/40W
http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/p...-bridge-is-95w
http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/p...ore-in-65w-tdp
http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/p...at-40w-tdp-kit
what is an intel shortest life socket?
That is simply impossible to blame on the processor. If all the other components were the same the AMD one couldn't possibly be slower.Quote:
Originally Posted by josh1980
If you have two identical systems with identical processors the one with the higher frequency is the fastest one.
How was it crap? I can't recall a single program in which a PIII 850 would be able to beat a 1GHz Athlon.Quote:
Originally Posted by josh1980
This have nothing to do with the processor, it has to do with settings in windows. You can't blame AMD for this.Quote:
Originally Posted by josh1980
In seems to me that there is something you aren't telling us, like a significant lower amount of ram in the AMD systems or a graphics card that isn't as good as the one in the intel systems you compare with.
Are your computers built by you or are they OEM systems?
Sounds like you have chosen to blame the CPU for a bad computer build. Oh well, you've made up your mind. Good luck to you. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by josh1980
Depends how you look at it, for example s775 had a rather long life, but that did not mean that every s775 cpu worked in ever s775 board.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatRaceTin
1156 socket is probably the shortest lived one from intel as it will be replaced by 1155 with the release of Sandy Bridge.
No, he was asking about the ENTHUSIAST (a.k.a high-end) parts coming in mid-2011.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuji
Same TDP as the current 980X, etc: 130W
@ Duploxxx
I did try to do my homework. I've never built an AMD system, they've always been friend's "elite" systems that they were upgrading with something even more "elite". My issue was with the gaping performance comparisions. Some I was left speechless (like EQ at 20 fps when Intel's was 35+ with the exact same physical RAM and GPU).
@ -Boris-
As for the 486 issue I have no idea what to think. It was a CPU upgrade so everything was identical to the intel CPU. If I remember correctly the AMD 486s were complete identical copies to the Intel 486s. I could never figure out what was different about the AMD chip, but as soon as the Intel chip was put back in and the DIP switches changed to the correct speed the computer got faster.
As for the laptop not working, I don't know what I'm "supposed to know that I'm not metioning". The issue from all of my troubleshooting pointed squarely to the CPU dropping to it's lowest speed as soon as I unplugged the laptop from the wall. I could watch videos and play 3d games on lower-mid settings. I had no issues with it until I tried to take it on the road where I had no wall to plug it in. Watching the CPU speed in CPU-Z was how I identifed the problem. The CPU would switch back and forth from 800Mhz(I think) to higher speeds and back every few seconds. When the CPU speed increased the video would play fine. But after a few seconds it would drop back to 800Mhz and the video would start skipping badly. It was as if the CPU couldn't figure out a good speed to stay at and and kept jumping between frequencies without finding a happy medium.
If the settings in windows are to blame I'd expect the same issues with Intel CPUs. For some reason, I've never had an issue with Intel CPUs like I have AMD. I'm not ruling out a Windows bug, but I'd think AMD would be pressing Microsoft to fix an issue as significant as the one I might have witnessed. Regardless of who is actually to blame for the issue, I see the issue as an issue with either AMD or Microsoft and I don't want to buy any more products that have those issues in the future. As for my Intel laptop it had less ram, smaller and slower hard drive, and much slower video card. I'd have used my intel laptop for travel except it has a 17" screen and I didn't want to lug that with me for travel.
@MrMojoZ
You are correct. I've built every desktop I've ever owned except the families first computer. Families don't trust 9 year olds to build computers ;). I've always had more than enough RAM for the tasks I use them for. My desktop has 24GB of RAM right now, and I've never seen it use 10GB before.
I did try getting advice from AMD friends for any special drivers I might be missing, but no matter what I did, it just never quite "worked right" for what I would expect.
Might be S423. But both S478 and S775 had many revisions that were incompatible. Using the same pin count don't guarantee longlivety.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatRaceTin
S775 was changed when Pentium D was introduced, the same goes for C2D, and again with C2Q. And each time the bus increased.
Which means that in order to be able to always use the latest Intel CPU you would need to buy a new motherboard at least 7 times during the life of S775.
It didn't have to. It is called "chipset" and usually means the difference between actually doing something on the computer versus : "I have the computer so I can spend my time fixing it ".Quote:
Originally Posted by -Boris-
The 440BX generation and the follow-on 81x series were some of the most stable chipsets I ever had the pleasure own. Those were miles away compared to VIA ( remember the KT series ? ), Ali,Sis and other "famous" brands.
Back in those days, when I visited friends with AMD systems, you didn't know where to start, is it Windows, the drivers or the chipset ? Heck, I didn't had those worries on the Intel platform.
ehhhh not really.... ^^Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler
say whAAAAAT? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by josh1980
dude, i had a p3 700E (7x100) overclocked to 7x140 and when i replaced it with an athlon 1ghz overclocked to 1.6ghz with ddr memory it was a different world... seriously, that was the single biggest performance upgrade i have witnessed until today... it was similar to going from hdd to ssd, but even better...
i looooved bx440 :DQuote:
Originally Posted by savantu
it overclocked really well... if only it would have supported ddr memory and ddr fsb... the 81x chipsets were cr4p imo... they didnt offer anything over 440, on the contrary, it overclocked WORSE, since intels fsb was still not ddr, the ddr memory support and rambus memory support was completely pointless as the fsb was the bottleneck, and oh boy, what a bottleneck it was... :D
the first sb parts will be 95W tdp max afaik, but thats without turbo, so realistically it will probably be close to current cpus when maxed out. ive heard from several people that 1155 might launch this year, the big 2-3 players are almost ready with their boards, so it will all depend on intel... since 1155 will be rather short lived as well i think they will have a hard time holding the board makers back to launch a new platform and make more money... then again... i really dont get how intel wants to sell 1155 though... i can already see the mass confusion evolving from the 1155 launch... the most asked questions will be "huh? im having a dejavu, didnt this platform launch last year? its new? are you sure?" and the follow up question which everybody will have a VERY hard time answering "ok, so that was 1156 and this is 1155... well whats new then?"
its a tiny bit cheaper
its a tiny bit faster
its a tiny bit more energy efficient
it has a faster igp, but of course you still cant game on it...
theres avx... which will make SOME apps faster... later...
i think they will focus on the igp and probably a lot of marketing about how awesome and advanced fusion is :D
Curious, just wondering why you say this?Quote:
Originally Posted by saayaehhhh not really.... ^^Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler
You are right on target with my philosophy. With Intel CPUs and all of the computer's I've owned after installing Windows you install the intel chipset drivers and whatever drivers the motherboard/video/etc manufacturers have and it just works. With my AMD computers there was issues and I had no idea where to start. AMDs are a little different. AMD's website offers tools and utilities, but when I had an issue I had no clue where to go to try to fix it. I don't want a computer so I can spend my time fixing it. Believe me I enjoyed the challenge of trying to figure out what was going on with my AMD systems. But after running out of options of how to fix it, it becomes frustrating and since nobody else I know is more detailed and thorough with computer systems knowledge I was left with nowhere to turn to but to accept that it was beyond my ability to fix it and I was stuck.Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu