Intel Strikes Back With Next-generation Chips

Mike Howes 18 Feb, 2006 at 6:37am ET Article published in Tech

Intel expects its forthcoming Conroe and Merom chips to deliver a performance advantage of at least 20% over chips from AMD that are slated to be released at the same time.

Intel has already disclosed that the new chips built with the Next-Generation Micro-Architecture, will use 4MB of cache memory. The Micro-Architecture also allows the processor to issue four instructions per clock, rather than three, as on Intel’s current chips.

The combination of all those architectural changes will allow Intel to outperform AMD’s planned offerings for the second half of 2006 without having to resort to adopting AMD’s integrated memory controller design, Eden said. “It will take at least a year and a half to two years to close such a gap.”

Source: CNet News.com

Comments

18 Feb 2006 ~ 1:25pm Garg

The combination of all those architectural changes will allow Intel to outperform AMD's planned offerings for the second half of 2006 without having to resort to adopting AMD's integrated memory controller design, Eden said. "It will take at least a year and a half to two years to close such a gap."

And how many years has it taken for Intel to close the gap?

IF the new chips are indeed faster than AMD, I can only imagine how much they'll cost. I don't think AMD will lose too many customers.
19 Feb 2006 ~ 2:48am Jengo

Gargoyle wrote:

And how many years has it taken for Intel to close the gap?

IF the new chips are indeed faster than AMD, I can only imagine how much they'll cost. I don't think AMD will lose too many customers.

Thats what i was thinking, Most of Intels offerings dont have bargain bin prices. But i cant wait to see WHAT the prices are for them, and how AMD will react.
19 Feb 2006 ~ 7:39pm Nightwolf

Intel Strikes Back With Next-generation Crap

Why don't they give up?
19 Feb 2006 ~ 8:31pm Leonardo The minute Intel gives up AMD becomes pompous, enormous, overpriced, and lacking in innovation...just like Intel the last three years. The best thing that ever happened to Intel was AMD. The best thing that ever happend to AMD was Intel.
19 Feb 2006 ~ 9:18pm reelbigfish Shouldn't the title of this news post really be "The Empire Strikes Back....."?
19 Feb 2006 ~ 9:31pm Leonardo

"The Empire Strikes Back....."

No, the metaphor is not good. Intel doesn't have a Deathstar. Hmm, well they do, it's called the Itanium, but it only points back at Intel. It's sucking billions (yes, thousands of millions) of dollars out of their budget and distracting their very capable engineers. Intel does have storm troopers, but they shoot their own people in the feet. If it's the Empire, it's run amuck. It's a corporation run by the marketing people. The worn out hype doesn't sway the masses like it used to. They are starting to wise up. I mean, how much market share can they watch being snatched right in front of them before they tell the marketing and PR idiots to shut up and let the engineers focus? They may be striking back, but AMD has moved much more than just getting a foot in the door.
22 Feb 2006 ~ 5:00am Anenome The real problem is that the CPU industry is now over-served with processing power exceeding the needs of most users (we could use more speed though). Intel keeps chasing the bleeding-edge high-performance chips ('cause that's where the money is), but your average person simply does not need 4 cores at 3+ gigahertz running 4 threads! There's not even a single program on the market that can take advantage of such a beast! Ppl can run Office and Word just fine as it is. Currently, only 3D gamers and those running extremely high-demanding apps need the latest tech. Even Photoshop is reasonably fast on an average PC.

This means that there will now be an increasing market for average power chips at a lower price point. Which means that $300-$400 laptops are on the way (hooray). Even memory is ridiculously cheap. I remember assembling PC's with 4 megs of memory! There used to be a day when typists used to have to slow down so the processors could keep up. Not today.

The markets needs are over-served. This leads towards commoditization in the industry, and towards modularity. AMD and Intel will fight over the high-margin areas, like servers, gamers, and high-demand application runners, while the rest of us sit back with sweet and cheap PC's that can do everything at very acceptable speeds. In economic terms, the marginal value of increasing performance has been dropping tremendously lately. This is why the margins have dropped out of desktop computers and Dell has suffered. Laptops command a higher premium, but are also dropping (Dell recently offered a $600 laptop at 1.8 gigz & widescreen, I'm tempted).

Consumers therefore will increasingly pay for ease of use, convenience, and portability (desktop replacements and laptops become ubiquitous). Vista, with it's security upgrades, will be well positioned to capitalize on all of this and should do much to fight virii and spam. Look for a 3D positional mouse to take advantgae of Vista's 3D interface (think Nintendo's new positional controller\wand).

This is good news for all of us. These two companies, AMD/Intel, must now change to fit the new dynamics of the industry. Both are integrated systems companies, but there will be increasing demand for modular designs, such as IBM's PowerPC design. Witness how IBM was able to take a single modular design (the PowerPC) and sell it to all three game-makers (Sony, MS, & Nintendo - note, even the Cell processor has a single PowerPC general purpose core though many decry that it has only one, and a stripped core at that). This is because CPU's are now 'good enough' and more performance now is something that most ppl simply aren't willing to pay for, which equals decreasing marginal returns, decreasing marginal utility (do I really need Word to be .0000001 seconds faster?).

However, graphics chips, GPU, still command a huge premium and ATI/Nvidia will be the next Intel/AMD, as the latter find themselves increasingly commoditized, and the GPU companies find they can still command a huge premium, and huge margins. I personally would love to pay $500+ for a bleeding edge awesome GPU, but not so for a CPU. Most feel the same. There's an nvestment opportunity there, FYI ;P
22 Feb 2006 ~ 5:40am Shorty Anenome .. great post! Very truthful
22 Feb 2006 ~ 6:49am Linc Anenome, have you considered registering? Check out my sig...
22 Feb 2006 ~ 7:30am muddocktor Anenome, that was a great summarization of the present market right now (except that $500 for a damn vid card is too high, IMO). Please feel welcome to register here and post.
22 Feb 2006 ~ 11:42am jradmin Anenome, thats one of the best break-down responces I've seen in a long long time!
22 Feb 2006 ~ 12:42pm a2jfreak

Anenome (Guest) wrote:

There used to be a day when typists used to have to slow down so the processors could keep up. Not today.

When did typists have to slow down for processors? Even an 8086 was able to read STDIN faster than anyone can type. The IBM Selectric virtually eliminated the need to slow down. My grandmother used one of these and she was clocked in around 140+ words per minute.
22 Feb 2006 ~ 2:24pm Garg I could type faster than the Macs we used in junior high. I don't know anything about their specs, but these were old school Macs.
22 Feb 2006 ~ 2:38pm Jengo I used to have to slow down for my old Pentium DX 133Mhz cheapo computer, it was annoying as hell
22 Feb 2006 ~ 3:16pm a2jfreak Perhaps while the system was swapping RAM to the HD and vice-versa, but I don't believe that a computer that isn't swapping (no matter how old it is) or having some other process eat 100% of the CPU cannot more than adequately keep up with someone typing . . . no matter how fast they can type.
22 Feb 2006 ~ 3:19pm primesuspect Anemone, if you're interested, we're always looking for writers here at short-media
23 Feb 2006 ~ 2:46pm GHoosdum My only need to upgrade my CPU is to churn out the WUs faster!

Anemone, what you say has a lot of merit. However, I agree with a2j in that it's I/O limitation rather than CPU speed that caused older computers to lag behind typist speed.

Personally, I'm worried about the trends in the CPU market. AMD has been creeping up in price since they won the performance crown. They're going to have to cut prices severely to remain the value leader in the latter half of '06 if Intel is going to be busting out with chips that perform 20% better - and we know that's not just hype; the Pentium M has been a phenomenal chip, and it will likely be even better in dual-core flavors. I know AMD has been gaining market share, but they really need to maintain the slice of the pie that they have if we are going to continue to see reasonable CPU pricing on our end of the market.
23 Feb 2006 ~ 3:36pm Leonardo Anenome, please join Short-Media. We welcome you with open arms.

Personally, I'm worried about the trends in the CPU market. AMD has been creeping up in price since they won the performance crown. They're going to have to cut prices severely to remain the value leader in the latter half of '06 if Intel is going to be busting out with chips that perform 20% better

I am not concerned. If I were buying AMD dual core now, well yes, I'd be a little peeved at the prices. The market will correct itself with respect to CPUs. (GPUs? The market is just nuts, in my opinion. Seems gamers will pay any price for even just slight advances.) AMD's pricepoints are high because of current demand, especially for server grade chips. AMD is selling everything they can get out of their fabrication facilities. Although the market is flooded with processors, the excess is mainly Intel products. Take a look at Ebay. See the availability of "new, unopened" boxed Intel CPUs.

It would appear that Intel, the marketing company that happens to make microprocessors, may have finally restrained the sales people and returned the engineers to what they do best - designing high tech components instead of taking orders from the markateers. I believe Intel's two-year history of self-inflicted wounds is coming to a close*. With the exception of the Opteron family, AMD CPU pricing will probably experience downward pressure when the competion of Intel returns. Until then, AMD is raking in cash that will enable more research, development, and maybe even real marketing.

*Except for the chronically hemorrhaging Itanium program.
23 Feb 2006 ~ 6:46pm Linc

GHoosdum wrote:

Personally, I'm worried about the trends in the CPU market...

You should look at my sig sometime, too
23 Feb 2006 ~ 9:31pm GHoosdum

General Keebler wrote:

You should look at my sig sometime, too

Thanks, Keebs. That's quite a compliment. I've often thought about submitting something, I just can't seem to find much time to write.
24 Feb 2006 ~ 10:47am Thelemech I really believe that the processors and even the computers today are not being used to there full potential.
The processor architecture design should be completly re-worked. More "marketectual" speed increments over the next few years does not create a stable and evolving computer network.
Both AMD and INTEL must inevitably create a class of processor that - evolves after it's initial creation. One that is not solely based on it being "discarded" in two years time.
I still love hearing about a AMD Galvatron 8.4 GHz or a Pentium 5 Ultra 8.4 GHz and I admit marketing has it's obvious place and does create innovation thru competition etc... - Is it not time to envision a processor from either firm that is a real keeper.
24 Feb 2006 ~ 11:09am a2jfreak Wasn't Galvatron the name Megatron assumed after his body was destroyed and he was re-made into a cannon?

More than meets the eye!

Thelemech wrote:

I still love hearing about a AMD Galvatron 8.4 GHz
24 Feb 2006 ~ 1:13pm Thelemech

a2jfreak wrote:

Wasn't Galvatron the name Megatron assumed after his body was destroyed and he was re-made into a cannon?

More than meets the eye!

Yes after a run in with ?(Omicron)? a huge planet sized transformer that devours and "assimilates" other mechanical lifeforms.
24 Feb 2006 ~ 7:55pm Qeldroma

Thelemech wrote:

I really believe that the processors and even the computers today are not being used to there full potential.

Doesn't mean they can't -> Like trying Folding@Home

Actually, there hasn't been a compelling CPU change for me since Northwood. At current prices, I'm still loathe to abandon my 3000+ for even an X2. There is still not a popular App or game I can't run satisfactorily somehow with my trusty XP.

However, Folding@Home has turned that around for me. Suddenly I'm interested in what will still give me the most WU bang for my $. A CPU improvement is likely to attract me for that reason. It used to be running a game server- now it's this. I guess when you already have the interest and have seen some of the horrors these diseases can do ....

I'm afraid I will never be a good enough writer to put it into words.
24 Feb 2006 ~ 10:03pm GHoosdum Well said, Qeldroma! Very well said!