Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (36611)	9/1/1998 5:08:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572167

Jim, Intels roadmap calls for a Celeron A 366 and 400 next year. The latter on a 100 Mhz bus. That will likely mark the end of the Pentium II, IMHO. Yeah, but by then, Katmai will be well into its volume phase. BTW, you seem to assume that Katmai won't be called Pentium II. Maybe they'll call it Pentium II Plus, but that sounds too much like "Apple II+". The Katmai will likely pick up at 450 and 500 and the segmentation will continue only then the Katmai will offer something the Celeron A doesn't, Katmai instructions. At least then the segmentation will be based on something other than Intels marketing strategy. The segmentation was created not only to draw out the differences between the current Celeron and the Pentium II, but to plot two different paths in the ever-changing roadmap. Surely future Celerons will be designed around the Whitney chipset, which will integrate the graphics controller in the chipset. Meanwhile, future Pentium II systems will take advantage of new technologies like RDRAM, Portola (?), AGP 4x, and maybe even IEEE 1394 further down the road. Intel knows that the platform is key, not necessarily the processor itself. Intel would still own the high end except for two things, K6-3 and K-7...not to mention the smaller die sizes...Intels plan is pretty darn good except for the die sizes. Well, the K6-3 will certainly be an exciting chip, but it all depends on when it can be released and pushed into volume. 256K of on-die cache on a lower-yield process isn't as trivial as a 128K on-die cache on a higher-yield (but larger die size) process. As for the K7, it's marketing position is confusing. If it's going to be on the Digital EV6 bus, then is the K7 going to be a server/workstation CPU to compete against Xeon? If it's going to be a replacement for the K6 line, then won't the EV6 bus be a little too costly? How viable will the EV6 bus be in an x86 system? Once again, the platform is key. Tenchusatsu