BRIGHT SIDE OF NEWS About | Advertise | Contact BSN USER Login
| Register 		SUBSCRIBE Newsletter | RSS Feeds
Monday, May 20, 2013
Email this to a friend.
Your friend's e-mail:
Your Name:
Your e-mail:
Message subject:
Comments
by: Anonymous on 1/25/2010
You guys seem to have missed a few things over the past year and a half.

http://en.expreview.com/img/2008/09/04/lynnfield.png

Sandy Bridge's schedule was endangered even in September 2008.
@Anonymous Wikipedia? by: Greg442 on 12/22/2009
Dude did you just cite Wikipedia? You do know Wikipedia is some made up BS right? That can be edited by any Tom, Dick and Harry at any time right? I read your references from Wikipedia, and nothing on Wikipedia supports your position. As I stated before Intel failed with Larrabee, and has likewise failed with Sandy Bridge, (integrated cpu and graphics). I was under the impression that failure was a bad thing, am I mistaken and failure is somehow a good thing now?
by: Anonymous on 12/22/2009
This was known more than a year ago! BSN get your act together.

Intel has stated that they "are evaluating options to adjust Sandy Bridge schedule to ensure sufficient Nehalem lifecycle," and so Sandy Bridge may be released later than originally planned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Sandy_Bridge_(microarchitecture)
by: Anonymous on 12/22/2009
Kovakovic totally nailed. Thanks for the clarifying comments Michael A. McKenney.
Intel does not do what they want by: Michael A. McKenney on 12/22/2009
The consumer decides on what they want to buy. Intel and AMD are more concerned about securing the server market than home users. You don't make money sell sub $250 CPUs to home users. You make money selling Opterons and Xeons.
by: Anonymous on 12/22/2009
well seeing as intel controls the world's supply of cpu's (for the most part) right now, they can do w/e the f**k they want
Intel Fails Again? by: Greg442 on 12/22/2009
With the huge failure of Larrabee, it’s obvious to me Sandy Bridge isn't quite ready either. What’s that ancient Chinese proverb… “sh*t rolls downhill.” I don't buy the BS of a selective push back because AMD Bulldozer has been delayed. Why is every failure by Intel measured by what AMD is doing at that moment? An excuse? Fanboyism? Let’s just call it like it is, Sandy bridge is delayed because Intel couldn’t deliver it as promised. It’s funny how an article supposedly about Intel starts by bashing AMD. A few preliminary japs at AMD at the beginning of the fluff piece to soften up the readers for a mini therapy session of Intel “brainwashing.” Brilliant!!
What is the rush? by: Michael A. McKenney on 12/22/2009
AMD has reached a standstill in new development. Intel with Larabee has done the same. It is not about competition any more. What is next? 128-bit would be great for SQL servers and supercomputers. 64-bit is barely being used. CAD, Games, A/V software use 64-bit.

It is like the imagination of what could be done is gone. Marketing gimmicks have taken over the engineers. We need to get the engineer back into designing. Too many companies base decisions on marketing only. What happen to engineers designing cutting edge hardware?

I sent 21 changes to Cisco for the ASA firewall. The engineers loved my ideas. Marketing did not understand them so they were not done.

by: Krestic on 12/22/2009
The thing is thats Moore's law slowed down. The techprocess doesn't get double smaller each 2 years, so is the tick-tack, since it in linear dependance from Moor's law.
by: Anonymous on 12/21/2009
i guess lack of competition hurts. specially the fact that there wont be any quad core 32nm parts until 2011 and i thought at least for desktop quad core is the mainstream.

even though i prefer intel parts i am definitely buying fusion or bulldozer next. i wish amd would release a bulldozer based mobile part. i have a feeling bulldozer would beat sandy bridge.
Cadence by: Anonymous on 12/21/2009
" then it fell apart. Westmere is a year late..." Westmere is not a year late. Typical Tick Tock is Q4, and historically mid November (see 45nm, see Nehalem). Westmere was scheduled for Q4 2009 launch, and based on past launches, people were expecting November 2009. Well, November came and went, so was Intel late? Pretty much "no" since it's always known when a company states release during X year, they mean Q4 or end of that year. And we know that Intel is announcing its launch with its partners Jan 07, which means they should have already shipped the 32nm products to companies like Dell, HP, etc. so those partners will have their products available for purchase on that day. Also, we've seen some retailers putting up pre-orders for the 32nm chips at the beginning of December, so either they got them in stock or they were expecting shipment really soon.
by: Anonymous on 12/21/2009
I don't think any company, Intel or otherwise, would choose to shorten the shelf life of their products just to match some Powerpoint slide that it made YEARS ago.

This is not news, BSN.
by: Anonymous on 12/21/2009
The 3D/Video/Photo world give a rats egg about Intel and its chips anymore.
Fi'd up (*morgs) by: Anonymous on 12/21/2009
I figured it would stop halfway through. My first disappointment was that although Nehalem was initially released in 08 the descent dual socket xeon's didn't arrive until 09. I was skeptical after that if they could release a 32nm product on the market in 2009 but was excited at the prospect of them pulling it of and therefore bringing sandy bridge closer. I was naive tho, thinking it's close to crunch time and Intel say their still on target so I guess they've pulled it off. Then I don't here anything about it and realise they f'd up.

You can't say they couldn't predict the recession it's important to them and so they should have known. I figure they knew they most likely wouldn't make it but decided to lie rather than lose investor confidence. You can't expect them to behave any other way it's business.

Nehalem does kick ass tho in maxwell render. Can't wait for something twice as fast.
Hopefully Xeon Sandy Bridge DP Server parts will arrive in May 2011.

thezeitgeistmovement
by: Anonymous on 12/21/2009
Did you all forget? A lot of this stuff was artificially delayed because of the economy. They are only about 1 qtr off from the tick-tock pic shown in this article (which is severely outdated). OMG tick-tock is done, off by 1 qtr, lets panic! Dont be rationale and remember things like poor-economy and a downed market!
by: Anonymous on 12/21/2009
This maybe just a sign that their tick-tock plans aren't as easy to maintain as they thought, sure no bulldozer will have made some impact but as we get smaller and smaller processes, the pace may not be as simple to impliment.
by: Anonymous on 12/21/2009
Intel could be focusing it's work on Larabee and catching up with the competition.
© 2009 - 2011 Bright Side Of News*, All rights reserved.
© 2009 - 2013 Bright Side Of News*, All rights reserved.