Intel highlights its next-gen dual-core chips

Intel President Paul Otellini announced three second-generation dual-core processors on Thursday and said first-generation prototypes are faring well.

In February, Intel said it was working on 15 dual-core chip designs, which combine two processing engines on a single slice of silicon, and on Thursday Otellini disclosed three new names.

Code names for those second-generation dual-core chips are Conroe, for desktop machines; Merom, for laptops; and Woodcrest, for lower-end servers with two processor sockets, Otellini said. They will succeed Presler, Yonah and Dempsey, respectively.

Otellini said Merom is scheduled to arrive "late next year," but didn't share other scheduling details. His presentation indicated that Conroe could arrive about the same time as Merom, but that Woodcrest will arrive after 2006.

Dual-core processors, which already have become commonplace in higher-end servers from IBM, Sun Microsystems and Hewlett-Packard, now are arriving in mainstream computers using x86 processors such as Intel's Xeon and Advanced Micro Devices' Opteron. The dual-core design philosophy is the chip industry's answer to the question of how to make chips more useful without making them consume too much power and throw off too much heat.

Although Intel has released dual-core desktop processors and plans to release Yonah by the end of 2005, rival AMD has the edge right now in the server market, where software is better adapted to take advantage of dual-core chips. AMD introduced dual-core Opteron processors in April and plans dual-core desktop chips in June.

But Intel said several of its dual-core prototypes are coming along well. "We are very comfortable we can bring them out in high volume," Otellini said of Presler for desktop PCs, Dempsey for two-socket and dual-core servers, and Paxville for higher-end four-socket servers.

That's significant, given the company's manufacturing power and market share. For example, even though Intel introduced 64-bit x86 chips midway through 2005--more than a year after AMD--it outpaced AMD in server shipments in 2004.

In addition, some dual-core test servers will arrive this year. Intel will distribute those machines this year using the Bensley "platform," which combines the Dempsey chip and an Intel chipset.

"We are planning to ship thousands of seed systems to the marketplace over the second half of 2005 to enable end users, as well as the hardware and software ecosystem, to get ready for these technologies," Otellini said.

He also said Intel plans to ship a "large quantity" of higher-end four-socket servers with the Paxville chip this year for the same purpose.

Also issuing bullish forecasts Thursday was Sean Maloney, executive vice president of Intel's Mobility Group. Intel has done well with its processors and chipsets for laptops, and now believes some of that success will carry over to processors for mobile phones as more companies build designs with Intel chips.

"A year ago we said we were disappointed with the pick-up rate. That is now starting to change," Maloney said. The company expects to ship application processors for mobile phones at the rate of 7.5 million per quarter by the fourth quarter of 2005, he said. In addition, Intel is working on an accompanying base-band processor--the one that handles radio communication tasks--for release in the second half of 2005.

Intel is working with Nokia and other partners to improve the software connection between PCs and mobile phones, allowing for the smoother transfer of digital photos and synchronization of contact lists, Maloney said. The company plans to unveil details of this effort at its Intel Developer Forum in the first quarter of 2006, he said.

Maloney added that Intel is unifying manufacturing operations for its mobile PC and mobile-phone handset work. "Up until now, we used separate manufacturing and design flows. Increasingly we will drive toward commonality," he said.

[scdecade]

Intel reeks of deperation lately

This roadmap seems likely to leave them further behind than they already are. All this BS about an alphabet soup of designs and about scores of "test" systems to seed the market smells very, very awkward and strident. Same stuff they've been saying about Itanium for like a decade.

[catchall]

deperation?

Over half the computers on the top 500 supercomputer list are running Intel chips.
http://www.top500.org/

They still have somthing like 80+ % of the market.
http://news.com.com/AMD+gains+market+share,+but+so+does+Intel/2100-1006_3-5557740.html

Damn, I wish I could be so desperate.

[Andrew J Glina]

AMD

Are you are AMD fanboy or just an Apple user? Intel have made a lot of mistakes lately but they are a large company with more going on than it may seem. Remember that only IBM have a good chance of beating Intel. Why? Because Intel and AMD have a deal that whatever AMD develops it must license it to Intel.

AMD signed it as they were desparate.

[System Tyrant]

Dual Core 64-bit

I don't think the argument is about who has the most market share because we all know it's still Intel and that isn't going to change for a long time. I think is comes down to who is more inovative. Intel did ignore 64-bit in the x86 until they saw it was catching on. Now they copied (legally of course) AMD 64-bit extentions (all but two I think) and adapted them to the P4 and Xeon procs.

When it comes to dual core AMD worked to make a better dual core design. Intel just slapped to P4 cores together so they could be first to the dual core market. The future hold lots of possibilities for both companies and their products.

I think most people forget that both AMD and Intel are good companies. AMD had a rocky start, but they are doing well now. Intel, too, has built itself up and has its stumbles along the way.

Intel has gotten a little egg on it's face over 64-bit x86 procs and I figure before this is all done they will get a little over their current dual core procs. In the end they will comeback with something really good that will no doubt upset AMD.

When buying a computer you should determine what you need and how much you can afford and base your purchase on that. Both AMD and Intel names signafy Quality. Anybody who argues with that is living in denial or the dark. Sure both have had their problems and with have some in the future, but all in all both have done very well with the quality of the products they produce.

[Andrew J Glina]

Spot On

AMD and Intel are both good companies and they keep each other honest. It would be a shame to see any of them fade away.