The AMD Execution Thread [2007 - 2017]
- Thread starter overclocked_enthusiasm
- Start date
-
- Tags
- amd
- Status
Will this measure from Intel be enough to help AMD?
*******
Intel to delay launch of three 45nm quad-core CPUs on poor AMD performance
Intel has recently adjusted its product strategy and will postpone three 45nm quad-core CPUs that were originally scheduled to launch in January next year, according to sources at motherboard makers.
Intel has already notified its partners that it will push back the launch of the three CPUs to February or March next year, depending on AMD's schedule for triple-core and the upcoming Phenom CPUs.
Launching the CPUs now will not benefit Intel much in its battle with AMD, while they could cause damage to Intel's 65nm quad-core CPUs, therefore the company has decided it is in no rush to release new products until AMD is able to present more of a threat.
The three CPUs that Intel plans to delay are the Core 2 Quad Q9300, Q9450 and Q9550, added the sources.
Intel commented that its launch of 45nm quad-core CPUs for desktops is on track for first quarter 2008, but declined to disclose a specific time-frame.
*********************
Intel is afraid of monopolistic charges.
*******
Intel to delay launch of three 45nm quad-core CPUs on poor AMD performance
Intel has recently adjusted its product strategy and will postpone three 45nm quad-core CPUs that were originally scheduled to launch in January next year, according to sources at motherboard makers.
Intel has already notified its partners that it will push back the launch of the three CPUs to February or March next year, depending on AMD's schedule for triple-core and the upcoming Phenom CPUs.
Launching the CPUs now will not benefit Intel much in its battle with AMD, while they could cause damage to Intel's 65nm quad-core CPUs, therefore the company has decided it is in no rush to release new products until AMD is able to present more of a threat.
The three CPUs that Intel plans to delay are the Core 2 Quad Q9300, Q9450 and Q9550, added the sources.
Intel commented that its launch of 45nm quad-core CPUs for desktops is on track for first quarter 2008, but declined to disclose a specific time-frame.
*********************
Intel is afraid of monopolistic charges.
Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.
Legend
There's also been reports that some of the large motherboard manufacturers have loads of X38 chipsets in stock, and this will give them time to sell that through in advance of X48 (?) for Penryn.
Just goes to show that without some kind of competition, there's no reason for incumbents like Intel to rush anything out the door when they can milk older technology for longer. When you're in the lead with no one chasing, you can afford to pace yourself.
Is Intel pacing itself in this instance?
It's only the start of the 45nm ramp, but if Intel was trying to get a decent amount of volume for a launch about a month away, there would be a fair amount of inertia for a sudden change of heart.
The lead time for volume production is timed in months, so Intel would be sitting on a certain amount of 45nm inventory and would be smacked with underutilizing two new and expensive fabs.
I guess there are other factors, but Intel already had an idea of AMD's non-competitive product line many months ago. They could have pushed back the launch then, before they had two fabs churning out for a launch of chips priced for a more general target market.
It's only the start of the 45nm ramp, but if Intel was trying to get a decent amount of volume for a launch about a month away, there would be a fair amount of inertia for a sudden change of heart.
The lead time for volume production is timed in months, so Intel would be sitting on a certain amount of 45nm inventory and would be smacked with underutilizing two new and expensive fabs.
I guess there are other factors, but Intel already had an idea of AMD's non-competitive product line many months ago. They could have pushed back the launch then, before they had two fabs churning out for a launch of chips priced for a more general target market.
Freak'n Big Panda
Regular
I think that is more of a PR tactic then anything else. Some sort of stab @ AMDs current woes. Intel wouldn't stand to gain much by delaying the production and sale of the 45nm CPUs. 45nm is cheaper to produce than 65nm, wouldn't make any sense to keep the bigger chips around any longer than needed. And if they were really worried about cannibalizing 65nm sales (due to excess inventory or other factors) they could just price them higher right?
Is that automatically true? It's been said here that the cost of wafer starts at a given process is a (decreasing) function of time, such that early on the per-die cost of the smaller node parts may exceed that of the older more mature process.
Yes, assuming that process have been debugged to weed out real yield killer.
I think I wrote that... But I also wrote in that same posting that this is only true for the fabless model, where the laws of supply and demand are in play.
In the case of Intel, the wafer cost is entirely dependent on how they want to calculate it in their accounting rules... In practice, this probably means that they want to go to the small processes as soon as they reasonably can.
OK, thanks for the clarification!
Someone pointed out that the delayed Intel chips are quad-cores.
Are the dual core 45nm chips delayed as well?
They are the same chip, and they both share the same competitive advantage over their respective AMD opponents. The only difference is the shared FSB for the quads, and the earliest rumor concerning a defect.
On the AMD front, Charlie at the Inq says rumor has it that AMD's Bulldozer design is delayed.
The reasons he gives are that AMD was facing a resource crunch and it couldn't launch both Swift and Bulldozer simultaneously, and that Swift's evolution of an already fixed design was safer than Bulldozer--which he claims is having design problems.
The unverified nature of those claims aside, this does dovetail rather nicely with the appearance of Montreal on the roadmap where Bulldozer should have been making its debut.
Are the dual core 45nm chips delayed as well?
They are the same chip, and they both share the same competitive advantage over their respective AMD opponents. The only difference is the shared FSB for the quads, and the earliest rumor concerning a defect.
On the AMD front, Charlie at the Inq says rumor has it that AMD's Bulldozer design is delayed.
The reasons he gives are that AMD was facing a resource crunch and it couldn't launch both Swift and Bulldozer simultaneously, and that Swift's evolution of an already fixed design was safer than Bulldozer--which he claims is having design problems.
The unverified nature of those claims aside, this does dovetail rather nicely with the appearance of Montreal on the roadmap where Bulldozer should have been making its debut.
AFAIU, Wolfdales(the dual-core Penryns) are still going to be released according to the old schedule, in January. As will the QX9770(I'm not sure about this last one, but I'm praying it will because I must posess it and it is impossible to scrounge it up from anywhere
).So the scenario with simply not wanting to cannibalize 65nm Quad-Core sales is likely.AFAIU, Wolfdales(the dual-core Penryns) are still going to be released according to the old schedule, in January. As will the QX9770(I'm not sure about this last one, but I'm praying it will because I must posess it and it is impossible to scrounge it up from anywhere
Why is the scenario likely only for the quad cores?
Because I'm making a guess that they probably have more 65nm quad-core inventory then they have 65nm dual-core inventory. And that demand is likely high enough for dualies to ensure that even the older parts will make their way into quite a few systems, whilst quads are a tad less general in appeal still and thus getting the cooler, cheaper 45nm parts out the door would cannibalize 65nm sales entirely. One last aspect would be that in general usage(read non-heavily multi-threaded stuff), the Wolfdales'll probably end up faster then Phenoms, and thus they'd spank AMD around even with non-release of the Yorkies.
This is a guess. I may be completely wrong, but the whole:"Intel has this bug, see" noise that came up at a very convenient time simply didn't strike me as very convincing. Not with the 9650 shipping and 45nm Xeons also shipping, but as I said, I may be horribly wrong
How is the availability of Intel's 45nm parts? Did AMD get lucky?
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/12/21/rumors-swirl-intel-45nm
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2007/12/21/rumors-swirl-intel-45nm
AMD Phenom CPUs to see further delays, Q2 '08 - DigiTimes
Perhaps not, it looks like they just pulled the trigger again...
Perhaps not, it looks like they just pulled the trigger again...
Digitimes said:
AMD Phenom CPUs to see further delays
AMD has recently notified its partners that the launch of higher-end quad-core Phenom processors, including the 9700 and 9900, will be postponed to the second quarter of 2008 from the original schedule of early 2008, according to sources at motherboard makers.
However, whether AMD's triple-core Toliman series CPUs will also see delay will be the key decision for the company, since Toliman offers a high price/performance ratio compared with Intel's quad-core CPUs. A delay for Toliman will hurt AMD the most, noted the sources.
The sources commented that the reason for the delay of 9700 and 9900 is because AMD has not yet been able to solve the translation lookaside buffer (TLB) erratum found in the chips. However, they added in saying that, in the long-term, AMD's decision is correct since pushing products that are not ready will only hurt the company more.
AMD declined to comment on this report. The company pointed out that it has not made any official announcement regarding a delay of the mentioned CPUs.
http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20071224PD200.html
AMD has recently notified its partners that the launch of higher-end quad-core Phenom processors, including the 9700 and 9900, will be postponed to the second quarter of 2008 from the original schedule of early 2008, according to sources at motherboard makers.
However, whether AMD's triple-core Toliman series CPUs will also see delay will be the key decision for the company, since Toliman offers a high price/performance ratio compared with Intel's quad-core CPUs. A delay for Toliman will hurt AMD the most, noted the sources.
The sources commented that the reason for the delay of 9700 and 9900 is because AMD has not yet been able to solve the translation lookaside buffer (TLB) erratum found in the chips. However, they added in saying that, in the long-term, AMD's decision is correct since pushing products that are not ready will only hurt the company more.
AMD declined to comment on this report. The company pointed out that it has not made any official announcement regarding a delay of the mentioned CPUs.
http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20071224PD200.html
Ya know, for the longest time I was pissed off at AMD, I felt as though they failed me personally as I had been one of their biggest supporters for the longest time. Now, anytime I read yet another piece of bad news I just laugh. This has got to be the worst-run tech company ever.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/21/chrysler-ceo-says-company_n_77829.html
Will AMD ever be so forthcoming
Will AMD ever be so forthcoming
Ran across a nifty link about early AMD-Intel litigation, informed in part by the arbitrator.
http://electronicdesign.com/Articles/ArticleID/17458/17458.html
http://electronicdesign.com/Articles/ArticleID/17458/17458.html
This is 2 days old news, but I guess it is worth posting it
AMD to launch triple-core Phenom CPUs in March 2008
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20071225PD219.html
AMD to launch triple-core Phenom CPUs in March 2008
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20071225PD219.html
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
