Intel chipset roadmap update

by Tuan Nguyen on 12/7/2005 1:46 PM EST
Comments Locked

13 Comments

Back to Article

  • porkster - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link

    Great our Intel beats AMD, yet it doesn't have the advantage of onboard memory controller to suit for single tasks, byt hey who wants single tasking anymore.

    Compare the frame rates in Farcray to those on a AMD using the bonus of a new ATI dual core driver, http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2629">http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2629, Intel wins even wihtout the driver yet.
  • Diasper - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link

    Just plain wrong.

    Porkster - back spreading the same old FUD..

    What part of your imagination are you getting the ideas that P4 is better than current AMD64 at games?

    Far-cry benchmarks:
    http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlo...">http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlo...

    Dual-core:
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...

    Single-core:
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...

    A good article here:
    http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1854912...">http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1854912...

    To be fair P4 generally is good enough to play any games happily as most games aren't CPU limited. However, of course when they are eg Half Life 2 it's outright embarrassing (eg first xbitlabs review) and that's at relavively real settings for most people (eg 1024x768). Now of course loooking more closely (the extremetech review) we can see the more particular problem is the much lower minimum fps of P4 systems - they're more variable.

    So, in short AMD *is* better. That said P4s are fine to play current games. Of course, then there's just to additional annoyance of extra heat, power consumption and noise of P4s as well as the inability to overclock them at all - contrast to being able to do that with the AMD and suddenly the P4 gets a complete beasting. Certainly, if not for some current games, a P4 will not be adequate.
  • Diasper - Thursday, December 8, 2005 - link

    At least if you're going to be trolling/fanboism wait for something worthwhile enough eg Yonah to come out and be available. Of course, availability will take a while yet and price will undoubtedly make it a no-go for desktop use.

    Wait for it to come out and then more reviews (eg those including minimum fps) before comparing it to A64 on a performance/price point.
  • Diasper - Friday, December 9, 2005 - link

    Xbitlabs review. Intel gets slaughted.

    http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/28cpu...">http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/28cpu...
  • Doormat - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    Whats so new about ICH8DH? Intel already had 1Gbit/s MAC in their ICH5+. I dont think there would be anything neat about it - stuff like TCP/IP offload engines arent in intel's best interest - why offload it from the processor? Its in intels interest to have the CPU do everything so you have to buy a faster processor.
  • tygrus - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    quote:

    Its in intels interest to have the CPU do everything so you have to buy a faster processor.


    I disagree. It is in Intel's best interest to have Intel based systems feature highly in benchmark tests. One way to boost benchmarks that focus on the network performance is to reduce the load on the CPU and increase the efficiency of the network interface ie. TCP/IP offload, DMA, scatter/gather etc. I think what Intel put into their $300+ NIC's which isn't in the onboard is some of the management, boot ROM, incl. software features.
  • Doormat - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    Who looks at benchmarks nowadays? If they did, they'd all buy AMD-based systems and not Intel. Benchmarks are overrated from a purchase perspective. No one ever gets fired for buying an Intel-based system!
  • tokath - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    Intel is not going to use TOE rather its a platform approach with I/OAT.
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    Except that Intel also sells chipsets, and business customers - especially workstation customers - want faster networking. If AMD and partners offer TCP/IP offload engines for mainstream platforms, Intel has to follow suit (and visa versa). Of course, I don't think the ICH8DH is going to be equal to a $500 PCI-X networking card.

    Also, with Intel emphasizing the "digital home theater" or whatever, they have to be concerned about CPU usage. If decoding an HD WMV9 video uses 80% of your CPU, you don't want to run the risk of stutter because your networking, audio, etc. are using the remaining 20%.

    Finally, Intel has never really been in the market of holding back technologies that it feels are ready for public use. "If you build it they will come." Give people more CPU power, and software developers will invariably find a use for it.
  • GentleStream - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    Do you know what the addressable memory will be for the 965
    chipset series? Will it be 8 GBytes or more?

    Also, I'm also interested in whether it will support Conroe?

    Thanks,

    Dave
  • coldpower27 - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link


    I am wondering if these will support the new Allendale/Conroe cores coming out in the latter half of 2006?
  • shabby - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    You'll probably need a new chipset, why release a chipset thats compatible will all cpu's when you can milk the consumer with updated ones.
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 7, 2005 - link

    965 isn't planned until 2Q 2006, so it ought to handle the next-gen processors (Conroe/Merom). That may be why the naming style changed as well.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now