What is wrong with the people at Intel?!?!?!

[speedy4500]

First of all, Intel has an awesome chip with the PIII-S 1.13 (tualatin core with 512k L2 cache). It was designed for servers, but in Sysmark 2001 it performs almost as well as a 1.33 Athlon, and better than a P4 1.5GHz!!!!! (Check benchmarks at Japanese site here (http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/pc/docs/article/20010709/hotrev117.htm) you have to scroll down a bit, there is a chart). It is easily on par with Athlons at the same clock, and I suspect that these tests were done with the PIII-S and SDRAM, and the chip will be compatible with DDR so the scores may be even higher. And yet the idiots in charge of marketing or whatever are planning on phasing out this line of chips in early 2002 or even late 2001 according to some tech websites. If I were to build a computer in the next couple of months, I would build one with a Tualatin and DDR, no questions asked, because it looks to be one hell of a combination. I also suspect that the chip will overclock nicely due to the .13 micron process. Will someone please explain to me why Intel is being so stupid?

[Placid]

They are trying to force people to buy p4's.
I think they are making a bad mistake.
They should just let demand determine what they make and not try to force.

[Hemitboy]

I would imagine they're trying to make way for the IA-64 Itanium... Isn't that supposed released approximately at the same time as you say they will phase out the Tualatin PIII's? Since Intel is betting the bank on Itanium they may not choose to offer an in-house alternative / competitor in the Tualatin.

[Placid]

They also wouldnt let motherboard mfgs make boards with nvidia crush chipsets for intel cpus.
Now I read this.


Hara said Nvidia is negotiating a license with Intel Corp. to connect the nForce chipset with Pentium 4 processors. He said the graphics firm isn't pushing for an Intel license at this point, "because AMD systems will take off our nForce production for the next year."

[Newbie_Doo]

To quote Samuel Clemens: "news of my demise are premature". Intel plans to kill the PIII formally, but likely not in reality for quite a while.

See this (http://www.theinquirer.net/21070101.htm) article for more information.

Anthony

[Hemitboy]

While the article linked to above does state that the .18 micron PIII's will be around for a while it doesn't offer the same hope as far as the .13 micron PIII's that I believe speedy4500 was referring too. To quote, "It said: 'Pentium III processor will be available to support legacy Corporate and Government commitments'. We suspect that doesn't mean the odd .13 micron Pentium IIIAs, which are only on the roadmap for two months, but .18 micron Copperminks."
...two months isn't that long for a processor fab run...

[[Oc]acaridans]

Hemitboy (Jul 26, 2001 05:34 p.m.):
I would imagine they're trying to make way for the IA-64 Itanium... Isn't that supposed released approximately at the same time as you say they will phase out the Tualatin PIII's? Since Intel is betting the bank on Itanium they may not choose to offer an in-house alternative / competitor in the Tualatin.


Speaking of look at what I found at pricewatch
http://www.pricewatch.com/1/3/3491-1.htm

[speedy4500]

Yeah, I saw that Itanium on pricewatch.....no way that Itaniums will be desktop procs. Low end Itaniums go for like $1800 i think i read in an Intel document. You can build a whole PC for $1800, and a damn good one at that. Another thing that I also read is that the next-gen Celerons will have practically the same core as the Tualatins. I guess Intel is playing the name-game.

[Newbie_Doo]

Actually, the article stated that the 512k PIIIs would remain for high-density server applications.

Quote: "* The Pentium IIIA at speeds of 1.2GHz, 1.13GHz and 1GHz belong in this box and expire at the end of Q3. However, the Pentium III-S, which have caches of 512K rather than the IIIAs, go from strength to strength in the ultra dense server space."

Anthony

[Hemitboy]

Newbie_Doo,

Good point. I didn't see that upon first reading of the article.