Intel 45 Nanometer, what happened to HP?
We haven't launched Intel's 45 Nanometer processor as planned. We, like many, were hoping that it would work flawlessly on certain chipsets - and well, unfortunately it doesn't - not yet anyways. Even though we were getting close to qualifying it - last week we received some really bad news. The bottom line is we're working on a solution for Nvidia SLI, but at the moment there isn't one.
Interestingly enough there are those out there configuring this processor in configurations which we *know* are unstable. I think their customers will be in for major disappointment based on current issues. ..although there are certain configurations which do work, the question is whether they deliver a decent value to the customer.
That said, it's not an issue of Intel's chip reliability, it's an issue of platform stability on certain current non-Intel platforms.
I don't want to get into the details, it's not a pretty situation. There is much confusion surrounding this launch -- it's somewhat unbelievable.
Interestingly enough there are those out there configuring this processor in configurations which we *know* are unstable. I think their customers will be in for major disappointment based on current issues. ..although there are certain configurations which do work, the question is whether they deliver a decent value to the customer.
That said, it's not an issue of Intel's chip reliability, it's an issue of platform stability on certain current non-Intel platforms.
I don't want to get into the details, it's not a pretty situation. There is much confusion surrounding this launch -- it's somewhat unbelievable.
Check out our new home at The Next Bench.
labels:
AMD + ATI,
AMD vs Intel,
ATI vs NVIDIA,
General Business
13 comments:
Wow. Kudos to you for sticking to a high level of QA. It's a shame that unsuspecting buyers are purchasing products that work together less-than-perfectly. Here's hoping compatibility issues with those "non-Intel" ahem nVidia chipsets can be solved via driver/BIOS updates. Not sure how that would impact the custom SLI motherboard Voodoo/HP is using though.
I wish you would get into the details
thats why we come to your blog
give it up man
Wow, HP is stuck with 680i because NVIDIA couldn't get 780i out on time. From what i see... vendors are selling X38, QX9650 and Radeon HD 3850. Wait a minute? Aren't you promoting the crap out of ATI cards with the Blackbird? This is when the whole OEM thing kicks in... In my opinion, boutiques will always have an edge on big OEMs for that one reason.
Peace,
Jonathan Seycound
Does Intel 45nm really matter as a 3.0GHz K10 will be a stone cold killer anyway? I cannot officially confirm this but a certain source has testified to it in the past.
Anyways it's unfortunate Nvidia does not have there act together yet, obviously Intel has a natural advantage on architecture changes (even minor ones like Penryn) as they will obviously have first access to their own CPU's.
Do you (or Nvidia) have a timeline?
Does Intel 45nm really matter as a 3.0GHz K10 will be a stone cold killer anyway?
Read the testimony again. I would encourage you to get some glasses :)
Thanks for the heads-up, Rahul. I am eagerly awaiting an update that says this issue is fixed...or that someone had started to play fair again...
"Read the testimony again. I would encourage you to get some glasses"
Oh you mean the old "versus currently available parts" claim, eh? Yeah that was fantastic analysis on your end comparing a product not slated to arrive until at least mid-2008 to parts that were available in the mid-2007 time frame. And before you make some ridiculous claim that you didn't know it would be late, leaked roadmaps (I think HKPEC?) at the time had the top K10 part as a 2.8GHz in the Q2'08 timeframe.
Please don't become another AMD apologist or marketing tool and mislead your readers - next time just include some data and let the reader decide what stone cold killer actually means. If you can't share the data then shouldn't make the claims...
Oh you mean the old "versus currently available parts" claim, eh?
Those were current parts vs parts that were to be available in 2007 -not MID-2008.
And before you make some ridiculous claim that you didn't know it would be late, leaked roadmaps (I think HKPEC?) at the time had the top K10 part as a 2.8GHz in the Q2'08 timeframe.
I don't read leaked roadmaps, I get my information from the source. AMD has made many missteps this year -- and I'm not afraid to say it. I do hope they turn it around.
Please don't become another AMD apologist or marketing tool and mislead your readers
As always, I call it like I see it. Go through and read my blog again. You'll see many positive notes on Intel as well.
Don't let your fan-ish reaction get in the way of reality. Thanks for reading!
One more thing, we looooove the new 45 nanometer parts from Intel. We love it! I love it!
Months ago we also chose the best platform for Blackbird - and what we believe is the most flexible.
If we were able to get it to work reliably on our platform we would. This is NOT a diss towards Intel, it's just a crappy situation.
Luckily at least one partner was up front and open with us - which we really appreciate.
We will likely launch the Intel processor eventually, but in a completely different configuration. Stay tuned.
wow.... this is crazy... thanks for the update. hope things work out, as I'm gonna build a new system based on the recently released new Intel chips.
"Those were current parts vs parts that were to be available in 2007 -not MID-2008."
There was NEVER a 3.0GHz planned for 2007 - I'm sure you will claim AMD told you this, but there was never a roadmap which had it. If you believed that a 3.0GHz was coming in 2007, or AMD showed you an internal roadmap with one on it, then you are gullible and should learn to not blindly accept everything you are told. Your blog on this was written in August when it was already clear around the web that AMD was having problems with Barcelona clockspeeds - it shouldn't have been too much of a stretch to figure out that the desktop version of the same architecture would also have clockspeed issues initially.
Being an AMD apologist doesn't necessarily mean you are anti-Intel - you do write many positive comments about Intel. Challenging your claims (unsupported with any published data) doesn't make me a "fan" or anit-AMD, it makes me someone who doesn't blindly believe anything that is printed in a blog.
As you obviously can't print any data (for whatever reason, though I suppose it has some NDA issue around it), you can continue to claim you're right. I obviously can't prove you wrong because it will be another year before I can get my hands on a 3.0GHz part from AMD. Generally though it is up to the person who makes a claim to back it up...and if you knew you couldn't publish the data, then you should not have made the claim in the first place.
BTW this was your close to the blog:
"It’s interesting to note that AMD isn’t showing benchmarks on a part that delivers the goods—perhaps it too is seeing that performance benchmarks are only a small piece of the overall experience puzzle."
Still think this is the case?
Anyway, I do appreciate the responses! I just hope in the future you will not be restricted from publishing data to support your claims.
Best of luck with the Nvidia/Penryn issues.
Still think this is the case?
Nope, from where I sit the only 'experience' I see from them is mis-step after mis-step. They need to fix things quickly or I don't know what's going to happen.
I don't have much sympathy for the situation.
Stay tuned? How long will it take for you guys to launch a skulltrail platform for your dual-purpose platform? Maybe even ditch the FSP power supplies?
Frankly, Nvidia had this coming... and has more coming. Dont bite the hand that feeds you.
Post a Comment