SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Ali Chen who wrote (41561)11/16/1998 4:43:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1572675
 
Intel starting to turn up the heat.
exchange2000.com

To: +Paul Engel (68606 )
From: +Tenchusatsu
Monday, Nov 16 1998
2:23PM ET
Reply # of 68609

Paul and all, Intel to accelerate roadmap for '99. Celeron 366 MHz
due first week of January, 400 MHz in March, 433 MHz in
mid-1999. Mobile Celeron 333 MHz due 2Q, 366 MHz mobile
Celeron in 3Q. Katmai due in late February, both 450 MHz and
500 MHz versions.

Also, Katmai 533 MHz on 820 chipset (a.k.a. Camino) due
mid-1999. This will be on 133 MHz bus.

zdnet.com

-------------------------------------

Intel targets low-cost PCs
By Lisa DiCarlo, PC Week Online
November 13, 1998 4:21 PM PT
URL:
zdnet.com

Intel Corp. is working to make up for lost time in the low-cost PC
market.

The Santa Clara, Calif., company has moved up the release date
of several processors geared toward low-priced desktops and
notebooks, according to sources. It has also
added faster processors, more capable chip sets and
management features to its low-end road map.

The moves, which follow the success of Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
and Cyrix Corp. in the low-cost PC market, will result in a wider
variety of lower-cost but
more-sophisticated systems.

At the same time, Intel will continue its usual price-cutting pace,
with plans to drop prices on almost all Pentium II processors in
early January, again in late February, in April and
again by mid-year.

After releasing a $160 366MHz Celeron chip during the first week
in January, Intel will boost the Celeron's speed to 400MHz in
March, sources said. The release of that chip
was moved up from the second half of next year.

In mid-1999, Intel will release a 433MHz Celeron, sources said,
moved up several months from its original release date of late
next year.

PCs based on Celeron processors will also include the forthcoming
810 chip set, which supports 2X AGP (Accelerated Graphics Port),
two DIMM (dual in-line memory
module) sockets, up to 256MB of RAM and Wired for Management
specifications.

By year's end, Celeron's clock speed will be bumped higher.
Sources said Intel is still deciding on whether to introduce a
100MHz bus into the low-cost Celeron line because the
resulting higher performance chip could cannibalize sales of
higher-priced platforms.

In Intel's mobile lineup, the release of the 333MHz Celeron has
been moved from the second half of next year to the second
quarter, sources said. The 366MHz Celeron for
portables is due in the third quarter, which should lead to OEMs
offering $1,500 portables.

The low-priced portables are likely to expand the market beyond
business users, who now buy the lion's share of laptops.

Intel will prolong the life of the Pentium Processor with MMX
Technology by introducing a $145 300MHz chip in January, and it
will also introduce a 366MHz Pentium II for
portables on Jan. 25, sources said.

The company has also slightly modified its mobile plans for the
Coppermine processor, due next fall. Once expected to serve the
midrange and higher-end notebook market,
Intel now expects the processor to enable 400MHz systems for as
low as $1,500.

Coppermine is a .18 micron chip that includes Katmai New
Instructions, a set of embedded three-dimensional instructions. It
will also be used in desktops.

In servers, Intel is also enabling sub-$3,000 dual-processor
systems, possibly based on a lower-cost server chip set or
architecture, sources said.

In between the introductions, prices will continue to drop.

A 400MHz Pentium II chip, which costs $375 today, will cost $200
by mid-1999, and today's $560 450MHz Pentium II will be priced
at $300, sources said.

Katmai processors will debut in late February, sources said, and
will be available for $530 at 450MHz and $765 at 500MHz.
Systems based on Katmai processors are
expected to start between $2,000 and $2,500.

Those prices, too, will drop in April when Intel drops Katmai prices
to $445 and $675, respectively.

Major PC enhancements are coming by mid-1999, when Intel
introduces a 533MHz Katmai, which will cost $745.

The faster chip will be coupled with a chip set called the 820,
formerly code-named Camino, sources said. The 820 will enable
4X AGP 3-D graphics and will support Direct
Rambus dynamic RAM, 1GB of RAM and Intel's first 133MHz bus,
sources said.

In addition, Intel will use the 820 to begin moving PC users off the
ISA bus. The chip set will make ISA slots and bus accessible only
through the PCI bridge, sources said.
----

Anyone wondering why/how Intel will bring Katmai out early without Microsoft Direct 7X support should remember that Intel has a stake in an operating system called BeOS...which Intel has stated that they will use for some "multimedia applications". BeOS is fast in itself because it lacks the legacy of windows 95/98. BeOS only works on Intel Pentium chips, might work on AMD chips and doesn't work on Cyrix chips.
Now, I don't know for sure if BeOS will support Katmai instructions but it's interesting that Intel has increased its stake in the company. I wouldn't be surprised if Intel showcased Katmai at the end of February on some machines with dual operating systems. Windows 98 and BeOS...Of course this is speculation but what else will Intel do if Direct-7x isn't around?
Maybe our Intel programmer, Badger, will give us a hint..since he posted the BeOS article on the Intel thread.

Regards, Jim



To: Ali Chen who wrote (41561)11/16/1998 5:04:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572675
 
<Ten, just to clear out our discussion about AMD K7 point-to-point vs. Xeon's shared bus. Read up:>

Ali, there's no doubt in my mind that point-to-point has its advantages. We've been over the advantages and disadvantages countless times.

The problem is that in the K7 platform, I just don't see the point (no pun intended) behind the point-to-point connections. Xeon buses are not overloaded even with full 4-way configurations, and this holds true even if the L2 cache size per processor is at the minimum 512K. That's pretty good for a "mediocre" 100 MHz bus speed.

Now considering that the K7 is going to be like a P6 with a few extra cylinders, there's no way that the K7's appetite for data is going to be that much bigger than the P6. Plus, that P2P connection doesn't include a direct path to memory like some implementations of Alpha. That's why the value of P2P in K7 is questionable, when a simpler bus architecture would have sufficed. Perhaps the K7 architects are much more forward-looking, but more realistically, AMD had no choice in the first place considering that they had to borrow Digital's EV6 platform.

As for the value of P2P in I/O buses like NGIO, I have no comment at the time, since I haven't had the time to look at the NGIO specs.

<It looks like the concealed copying is still at habit over there (just joking, as usual!) And they didn't tell even you, a loyal employee... Geez, what a company...>

There's a lot of things that Intel doesn't tell me, a loyal employee, mainly because I'm not paid to know them, and even if I were, I wouldn't be telling you, either. But I can tell you that there's a lot of things that I *do* know that blind AMD supporters wouldn't and shouldn't know, such as juicy details on the @&*#($&&*#& ...

...

...

...

The remainder of this message has been intercepted by Intel intelligence. Have a nice day.

...

...

NO CARRIER



To: Ali Chen who wrote (41561)11/16/1998 6:13:00 PM
From: FJB  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572675
 
First, HP had to agree that Intel would control all of Merced's design decisions, even those involving the EPIC architecture that
HP had already developed. For HP engineers who had worked on the architecture for more than five years, this was the most
bitter pill to swallow.

dailynews.yahoo.com