- Related Stories
-
Early tests give advantage to Intel's Conroe
March 14, 2006 -
Intel's new chip family: Core microarchitecture
March 7, 2006 -
Intel links up with the movie studios
January 5, 2006 -
Bidding adieu to Pentium M
December 21, 2005 -
Intel launches Dothan, new naming scheme
May 10, 2004
Intel has decided to borrow the sequential naming scheme it used for its famous Pentium brand and apply it to the new Core line of chips, the company is expected to announce Sunday. Earlier this year, Intel released the Core Duo processor, and in a few months it will unveil Core 2 Duo processors. The Core 2 Duo name will be used for desktop chips based on the Conroe chip, as well as for notebook chips based on the Merom chip. Merom processors consume less power than Conroe chips, but they're otherwise very similar.
its Conroe and Merom processors
borrows from the Pentium
branding legacy, as it will be
the second Core Duo product.
Each Core 2 Duo chip will also have a model number that will indicate how much power it consumes and its relative performance, said Intel spokesman Bill Kircos. The Conroe processors will fall into either the 4000 series or 6000 series, while Merom processors will use either the 5000 series or 7000 series numbers, he said.
Conveniently, the Conroe numbers match up well with the model numbers used by Advanced Micro Devices on its current generation of dual-core Athlon 64 X2 desktop processors. AMD's highest-rated Athlon 64 X2 processor as of Friday is the X2 4800+. Kircos declined to comment on whether Intel chose the new scheme to line up with AMD's model numbers.
Each one of Intel's model numbers will be preceded by a letter that indicates how much power the chip consumes at its peak. This is the first time Intel has incorporated power consumption into its model numbers. For example, the Core 2 Duo E6800 processor would represent a dual-core Core-architecture processor that consumes between 55 watts and 75 watts of power, which Intel considers the standard desktop PC category. The hypothetical Core 2 Duo T5400 would represent a dual-core Core chip that consumes between 25 watts and 55 watts of power, a range Intel thinks is appropriate for most notebooks and some desktops.
Over the last year Intel has put increasing emphasis on its platform brands, such as Centrino for notebooks, Viiv for entertainment PCs and vPro for business PCs. But the company will continue to emphasize the individual processor brands, Kircos said. "I think you'll see equal amounts of marketing around the processor and platform brands," he said.
The end appears nigh for the Pentium brand, which has carried Intel for 13 years. Intel is expected to rapidly shift its factories to cranking out Core processors by the end of the year.
Last week, Intel announced plans to bring out the Conroe and Merom chips in July and August, respectively, which is earlier than expected.
See more CNET content tagged:
Intel Core Duo, Intel Core 2 Duo, Intel, Intel Pentium, dual-core
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04/conroe-performance-claim-being-busted.html
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04/intel-exec-does-guerilla.html
even they don't even give AMD much of a lead. If you want real
benchmarks, use the full 64bit integer width for the streaming
and encryption tasks (since Core 2 is reportedly a fully 64-bit
processor... there's no such thing as a "Core32 Duo 2" as far as
any information I've read says.) Also, use Intel's compiler
compiled for the current ISA. At that point, I suspect AMD will
be so far behind in pure performance, and not even on the map
in performance per Watt, that it just won't matter.
The were not sure if the benchmark was fair (people cried out about the dated BIOS version on the AMD system for instance) but they later got their hands on some chips to play with and posted an updated benchmark here: http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2716
What they found out in the updated review is the Intel's black box was also handicapped with 5-5-5-15 memory timings instead of 4-4-4-15
In the updated benchmarks Intel did just as well or better than the IDF system everyone cried about. Anandtech has this to say on the matter:
"If anything, Intel?s own demo was a little more conservative on Conroe and definitely not optimized to make AMD look bad."
I think I'll take their word for it.
1/ you work for AMD
2/ you live in the basement of your parent?s house
3/ you have a dedicated T1 connection with 5 or 6 PCs networked to each other, and the main use is playing games and burning motherboards with overclocking
4/ when you take a break you watch Xena tapes and your diet consists of Hot-Pockets and Mountain Dew
I know some hardcore geeks that behave that way, but they are not that linear in thinking/
I hope you don?t mind me passing your Journal URL to some of my buddies from various animation studios. We all get a kick reading psycho journals. That?s what we do when we take short breaks during rendering.
By the way, since I?m a 3D animator (and I also use Opterons) I do know some of the many marketing tricks going in the industry. Here is one secret from many others ? AMD and Intel give away chips to many big design studios in exchange for getting ?the name? in their portfolios. When late last year ILM accepted nearly 4000 Opteron giveaway from AMD, AMD flooded the Internet with the same PR thing (?We are better than Intel?). ILM accepted the AMD offer because it was an expensive freebie, and for the time being Opterons are better than Xeons. If ILM decides to open new render farms in the near future, they?ll go for the chips that are best in that year. Does it matter if it?s AMD or Intel? NO. The same goes with 3D software (Maya, Softimage, 3ds Max, Lightwave, Houdini) claims in movies - the highest bidder always wins.
I know that some of my comments before where heavily attacked by AMD fanatics with the usual ?numbers? thing ? the classical syndrome of ?delusions of eloquence.? The only person that took my side was this user ?anarchy1999? whose claims made me investigate the shallow marketing in the corporate world. I can?t seem to find the bottom of this ?marketing pit?, and I?m not that cheap to sell my soul to a ?chip? company. Also some of these AMD fanatics started ranting also about MS Windows XP Pro X64 and how good it is with AMD. For your info, none of the design studios uses that version of MS OS because it?s just a joke with unlimited bugs. Every studio uses Linux, Windows XP Pro and Tiger.
I?m not sure how AMD can prove its better that Intel. Do I trust either chip company in putting together a workstation ready to be tested under certain conditions? Of course NOT and I?m not willing to bet on any kind ?warmonger? behavior. That?s why in my previous entry I compared AMD with Wal-Mart. This ?warmonger? behavior coming from the AMD camp is just stupid. Sorry I can?t find the right words for this. If you are an innovative chip company you should already know that a ?chip? is just part of the bigger picture. Invest your money in R&D, and not Las Vegas style marketing.
So, do I care about AMD and Intel? Yes and that is only up to a point. Am I willing to heavily bet on just AMD or Intel? OF COURSE NOT. Am I willing to bet on Velocity Micro, Falcon Northwest, VoodooPC, Boxxtech and Apple? Of course YES because they are great computer companies and they are not obsessed with just one computer part.
Good night and good luck!
For those who haven't come across any of Sharikou's postings before, just Google him. You'll find that he's so biased that you really can't trust anything that he says or writes. He's pretty widely known as a wacko.
Personally I'll buy whatever processor is going to give me the best performance. I'm not wedded to any particular brand. And I have very little tolerant for the lunatic fringe.
;)
the only time when you can really test 2 chips, is when you use 2 workstations from the same manufacturers with the same brand parts, and the configuration is identical with the chip exception. but when you read the small print in all these tests, you see that everything is bias. if you want to make amd win all you have to do is change ram model numbers or brands. the same can be done with intel. small changes like that can add a few milliseconds in performance.
apart from amd, do you want you hear another stupid thing? cnet made a review of 2 laptops - mac vs acer. now how stupid can you get?
1.) The word you were trying for is, "guerilla".
2.) Below are actual legitimate news sources not FUD links.
3.) Finally, learn the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit instructions and computing with processors; as the Core2 is fully 64-bit.
The final benchmarks will be out soon enough. AMD and Intel shall ever flip-flop benchmark wins until the day one, the other or both disappear.
Anandtech - Benchmarks (updated with more info)
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2716&p=6
Anandtech - Intel Core2 series
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2748
"The Intel Core architecture is clearly the heir and descendant of the hugely successful P6 architecture. However, it has state of the art technology on board such as micro-op/macro-op fusion, memory disambiguation and massive SIMD/FP power.
Compared to the excellent AMD K8/Hammer architecture, the Core CPU is simply a wider, more efficient and more out of order CPU. "
Ars Technica - Intel Core2 series
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/core.ars
Who wins? Hopefully everyone; especially the consumers. AMD and Intel and any and all others keep on bringing the performance. It's just Intel's turn to flex for the moment.
Deal with it.
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04/conroe-performance-claim-being-busted.html
http://sharikou.blogspot.com/2006/04/intel-exec-does-guerilla.html
even they don't even give AMD much of a lead. If you want real
benchmarks, use the full 64bit integer width for the streaming
and encryption tasks (since Core 2 is reportedly a fully 64-bit
processor... there's no such thing as a "Core32 Duo 2" as far as
any information I've read says.) Also, use Intel's compiler
compiled for the current ISA. At that point, I suspect AMD will
be so far behind in pure performance, and not even on the map
in performance per Watt, that it just won't matter.
The were not sure if the benchmark was fair (people cried out about the dated BIOS version on the AMD system for instance) but they later got their hands on some chips to play with and posted an updated benchmark here: http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2716
What they found out in the updated review is the Intel's black box was also handicapped with 5-5-5-15 memory timings instead of 4-4-4-15
In the updated benchmarks Intel did just as well or better than the IDF system everyone cried about. Anandtech has this to say on the matter:
"If anything, Intel?s own demo was a little more conservative on Conroe and definitely not optimized to make AMD look bad."
I think I'll take their word for it.
1/ you work for AMD
2/ you live in the basement of your parent?s house
3/ you have a dedicated T1 connection with 5 or 6 PCs networked to each other, and the main use is playing games and burning motherboards with overclocking
4/ when you take a break you watch Xena tapes and your diet consists of Hot-Pockets and Mountain Dew
I know some hardcore geeks that behave that way, but they are not that linear in thinking/
I hope you don?t mind me passing your Journal URL to some of my buddies from various animation studios. We all get a kick reading psycho journals. That?s what we do when we take short breaks during rendering.
By the way, since I?m a 3D animator (and I also use Opterons) I do know some of the many marketing tricks going in the industry. Here is one secret from many others ? AMD and Intel give away chips to many big design studios in exchange for getting ?the name? in their portfolios. When late last year ILM accepted nearly 4000 Opteron giveaway from AMD, AMD flooded the Internet with the same PR thing (?We are better than Intel?). ILM accepted the AMD offer because it was an expensive freebie, and for the time being Opterons are better than Xeons. If ILM decides to open new render farms in the near future, they?ll go for the chips that are best in that year. Does it matter if it?s AMD or Intel? NO. The same goes with 3D software (Maya, Softimage, 3ds Max, Lightwave, Houdini) claims in movies - the highest bidder always wins.
I know that some of my comments before where heavily attacked by AMD fanatics with the usual ?numbers? thing ? the classical syndrome of ?delusions of eloquence.? The only person that took my side was this user ?anarchy1999? whose claims made me investigate the shallow marketing in the corporate world. I can?t seem to find the bottom of this ?marketing pit?, and I?m not that cheap to sell my soul to a ?chip? company. Also some of these AMD fanatics started ranting also about MS Windows XP Pro X64 and how good it is with AMD. For your info, none of the design studios uses that version of MS OS because it?s just a joke with unlimited bugs. Every studio uses Linux, Windows XP Pro and Tiger.
I?m not sure how AMD can prove its better that Intel. Do I trust either chip company in putting together a workstation ready to be tested under certain conditions? Of course NOT and I?m not willing to bet on any kind ?warmonger? behavior. That?s why in my previous entry I compared AMD with Wal-Mart. This ?warmonger? behavior coming from the AMD camp is just stupid. Sorry I can?t find the right words for this. If you are an innovative chip company you should already know that a ?chip? is just part of the bigger picture. Invest your money in R&D, and not Las Vegas style marketing.
So, do I care about AMD and Intel? Yes and that is only up to a point. Am I willing to heavily bet on just AMD or Intel? OF COURSE NOT. Am I willing to bet on Velocity Micro, Falcon Northwest, VoodooPC, Boxxtech and Apple? Of course YES because they are great computer companies and they are not obsessed with just one computer part.
Good night and good luck!
For those who haven't come across any of Sharikou's postings before, just Google him. You'll find that he's so biased that you really can't trust anything that he says or writes. He's pretty widely known as a wacko.
Personally I'll buy whatever processor is going to give me the best performance. I'm not wedded to any particular brand. And I have very little tolerant for the lunatic fringe.
;)
the only time when you can really test 2 chips, is when you use 2 workstations from the same manufacturers with the same brand parts, and the configuration is identical with the chip exception. but when you read the small print in all these tests, you see that everything is bias. if you want to make amd win all you have to do is change ram model numbers or brands. the same can be done with intel. small changes like that can add a few milliseconds in performance.
apart from amd, do you want you hear another stupid thing? cnet made a review of 2 laptops - mac vs acer. now how stupid can you get?
1.) The word you were trying for is, "guerilla".
2.) Below are actual legitimate news sources not FUD links.
3.) Finally, learn the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit instructions and computing with processors; as the Core2 is fully 64-bit.
The final benchmarks will be out soon enough. AMD and Intel shall ever flip-flop benchmark wins until the day one, the other or both disappear.
Anandtech - Benchmarks (updated with more info)
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2716&p=6
Anandtech - Intel Core2 series
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2748
"The Intel Core architecture is clearly the heir and descendant of the hugely successful P6 architecture. However, it has state of the art technology on board such as micro-op/macro-op fusion, memory disambiguation and massive SIMD/FP power.
Compared to the excellent AMD K8/Hammer architecture, the Core CPU is simply a wider, more efficient and more out of order CPU. "
Ars Technica - Intel Core2 series
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/core.ars
Who wins? Hopefully everyone; especially the consumers. AMD and Intel and any and all others keep on bringing the performance. It's just Intel's turn to flex for the moment.
Deal with it.
power consumption. The T1xxx is single core full power, T2xxx is
dual core full power, L2xxx is dual core low power, U1xxx is single
core ultra-low power.
So it's probably safe to assume that we'll see a similar arrangement,
T for full power, L for low power, U for ultra-low-power. (And
probably D as the prefix for desktop parts, X for the 'Extreme'
parts.)
power consumption. However, there are no predefined wattages for
their current naming scheme. T, L, and U are subjective standards
set by Intel. The new scheme will provide an objective power
consumption rating. I can't see that this will change anything, but it
does give more credibility to a company that, until recently, didn't
care that users needed to install a small freezer into their
computers to keep the thing from melting down.
power consumption. The T1xxx is single core full power, T2xxx is
dual core full power, L2xxx is dual core low power, U1xxx is single
core ultra-low power.
So it's probably safe to assume that we'll see a similar arrangement,
T for full power, L for low power, U for ultra-low-power. (And
probably D as the prefix for desktop parts, X for the 'Extreme'
parts.)
power consumption. However, there are no predefined wattages for
their current naming scheme. T, L, and U are subjective standards
set by Intel. The new scheme will provide an objective power
consumption rating. I can't see that this will change anything, but it
does give more credibility to a company that, until recently, didn't
care that users needed to install a small freezer into their
computers to keep the thing from melting down.
i live in marketing and i know how low companies will go to attract share holders.
to this day i still don't know why apple chose intel over amd. both chip companies were kissing apple butt really good and throwing money in r&d transitional phase. but steve jobs chose intel. if i knew the reason for it, most likely i'll be sued for insider trading. so i'll keep that vault closed.
i don't know why intel is not defending itself from amd marketing bashing. hello intel wake up! if amd would have picked on apple for using intel chips, steve jobs would have liquidated amd in 5 working days so he can play golf on saturday and sunday.
marketing bashing is normal in the market. everybody does it and it has been going on for at least 15 years. as long as amd doesn't claim that their chips are used in the international space station, or stealth bombers, amd is safe. on the mean time they can bend and break the rules any way they want as long as they are not breaking the law.
why do you think amd is suing intel from delaware? it's just a legal manipulation because amd is buying sympathy. delaware feels sympathetic to the little guy. amd reminds me of the movie - the good son. if they would sue intel in california, the whole case would be thrown out of court due to intellectual retardation. everybody in the it industry knows that. the corporate cooperation in the case of amd vs intel, has been very friendly because they have nothing to hide. but amd has too much money to spend. it looks like amd is out of prescription medication and hasn't gone for a refill.
I understand what you are trying to say, and I?m not willing to walk the line with marketing bashing. That?s too shallow for my taste and I have better things to do than worry about chip fanatics.
The reality with both AMD and Intel is that they can?t keep up with the demand. If one of them has problems with supply, the other will take the lead. OEMs don?t care about Las Vegas style ads from either chip manufacturer. As long as they get the chips needed, the can built more PCs and make money.
Unfortunately AMD and Intel are obsessed about OEMs because of volume of sales. Can AMD meet both consumer and corporate demand? The answer is simple ? NO. And neither can Intel. May be that?s why Intel decided to take a change with Apple. Of course that made Dell really pissed off because Apple is now very?very flexible which makes a win-win situation for the consumer.
Unlike Intel which owns & controls everything in chip manufacturing, AMD has only a few fabs (in comparison to the numbers at Intel) and the rest of AMD chips are made by third-party fabs in Taiwan. I think AMD is playing a psychological game. For example, the new Opterons are made in Dresden - Germany. Does that mean that everything made in Germany is fantastic? Try Jeigermiester for a change and see what kind of faces you make.
I?m glad Intel is catching up, because competition is good for business. Otherwise it?s just a monopoly. I also value honesty from chip manufacturers. I don?t see that coming from AMD camp. I?ve seen AMD marketing mixing technical concepts with no logical definition. Do the marketing people at AMD think that ?64-bit architecture?, ?64-bit platform? and ?64-bit extensions? are all the same? I don?t know for sure if the left hand at AMD knows what the right hand does. Otherwise we are dealing with a funny legal issue.
I?m getting tired of thinking why the AMD camp promotes a ?warmonger? behavior. There is no logic for stupidity and I feel sorry for the average consumer being brainwashed by chip fanatics.
Since Intel chips are now used in Apple, people should ?think different? and let creativity flow ? ?leap ahead.?
i live in marketing and i know how low companies will go to attract share holders.
to this day i still don't know why apple chose intel over amd. both chip companies were kissing apple butt really good and throwing money in r&d transitional phase. but steve jobs chose intel. if i knew the reason for it, most likely i'll be sued for insider trading. so i'll keep that vault closed.
i don't know why intel is not defending itself from amd marketing bashing. hello intel wake up! if amd would have picked on apple for using intel chips, steve jobs would have liquidated amd in 5 working days so he can play golf on saturday and sunday.
marketing bashing is normal in the market. everybody does it and it has been going on for at least 15 years. as long as amd doesn't claim that their chips are used in the international space station, or stealth bombers, amd is safe. on the mean time they can bend and break the rules any way they want as long as they are not breaking the law.
why do you think amd is suing intel from delaware? it's just a legal manipulation because amd is buying sympathy. delaware feels sympathetic to the little guy. amd reminds me of the movie - the good son. if they would sue intel in california, the whole case would be thrown out of court due to intellectual retardation. everybody in the it industry knows that. the corporate cooperation in the case of amd vs intel, has been very friendly because they have nothing to hide. but amd has too much money to spend. it looks like amd is out of prescription medication and hasn't gone for a refill.
I understand what you are trying to say, and I?m not willing to walk the line with marketing bashing. That?s too shallow for my taste and I have better things to do than worry about chip fanatics.
The reality with both AMD and Intel is that they can?t keep up with the demand. If one of them has problems with supply, the other will take the lead. OEMs don?t care about Las Vegas style ads from either chip manufacturer. As long as they get the chips needed, the can built more PCs and make money.
Unfortunately AMD and Intel are obsessed about OEMs because of volume of sales. Can AMD meet both consumer and corporate demand? The answer is simple ? NO. And neither can Intel. May be that?s why Intel decided to take a change with Apple. Of course that made Dell really pissed off because Apple is now very?very flexible which makes a win-win situation for the consumer.
Unlike Intel which owns & controls everything in chip manufacturing, AMD has only a few fabs (in comparison to the numbers at Intel) and the rest of AMD chips are made by third-party fabs in Taiwan. I think AMD is playing a psychological game. For example, the new Opterons are made in Dresden - Germany. Does that mean that everything made in Germany is fantastic? Try Jeigermiester for a change and see what kind of faces you make.
I?m glad Intel is catching up, because competition is good for business. Otherwise it?s just a monopoly. I also value honesty from chip manufacturers. I don?t see that coming from AMD camp. I?ve seen AMD marketing mixing technical concepts with no logical definition. Do the marketing people at AMD think that ?64-bit architecture?, ?64-bit platform? and ?64-bit extensions? are all the same? I don?t know for sure if the left hand at AMD knows what the right hand does. Otherwise we are dealing with a funny legal issue.
I?m getting tired of thinking why the AMD camp promotes a ?warmonger? behavior. There is no logic for stupidity and I feel sorry for the average consumer being brainwashed by chip fanatics.
Since Intel chips are now used in Apple, people should ?think different? and let creativity flow ? ?leap ahead.?
http://geekswithblogs.net/lorint/archive/2006/05/08/77566.aspx
-Lorin Thwaits
The real indication of the future will be the performance of the Conroe/Merom processor technology, which is Intel's next generation architecture. Early indications are that it will increase Intel's performance considerably, but nobody will really know until production processors hit the street.
However, what you say is certainly true. No processor hits its peak performance under all conditions. Different processors fit different applications. But that's not a characteristic of Intel processors. The same applies to processor architectures from AMD, IBM, Sun, etc.
http://geekswithblogs.net/lorint/archive/2006/05/08/77566.aspx
-Lorin Thwaits
The real indication of the future will be the performance of the Conroe/Merom processor technology, which is Intel's next generation architecture. Early indications are that it will increase Intel's performance considerably, but nobody will really know until production processors hit the street.
However, what you say is certainly true. No processor hits its peak performance under all conditions. Different processors fit different applications. But that's not a characteristic of Intel processors. The same applies to processor architectures from AMD, IBM, Sun, etc.
The only question is will the BIOS updates support it as well.
My Dell Inspiron 9400 is the Core Duo at the moment. I too would like a Core2 Duo processor in the near future.
The only question is will the BIOS updates support it as well.
My Dell Inspiron 9400 is the Core Duo at the moment. I too would like a Core2 Duo processor in the near future.
cpu market is too biased. I dont remember such holywars for neither gpus or hdds or anythign else.
cpu market is too biased. I dont remember such holywars for neither gpus or hdds or anythign else.
- Yes
- by Diegoum July 14, 2006 7:40 AM PDT
- Word on the street is that they will indeed be compatible and that only a BIOS update will be required.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(64 Comments)