Intel engineer discusses their dual-core design

[Trex]

Yep, but to hear Intel talk of their new leadership direction - you'd
think it was the other way around ie they were too engineering oriented
and focused too much on performance. I did get a giggle reading this in an
article about their new CEO in some business mag while waiting at the
hospital.

Intel's & Sony's problems are the same. Engineering hubris. Neither
company has strong "product marketing". However, they both have strong
"brand marketing", etc. You may be confusing the two. If they had good
product management (with executive support), they'd probably not be
having the troubles they have now.

Remember, the job of engineering is documentation.

 

[David Schwartz]

Only because they couldn't. They *were* going to do an MCM.

Which means that "dual core" must include an MCM.

Are you always this stupid?

Are you always this rude?

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-5589445.html

I can post dozens of other references that show that the phrase "dual
core" can be used to refer to two CPUs in a single package, rather than on a
single die.

DS

 

[Tony Hill]

My question then is:
(1) The readers of this group are probably more tech savvy than average,
so would you say that you have followed my downward opinion of Sony over
the past 10 yrs?

Definitely. I remember the whole time I was growing up my family and
I bought almost exclusively Sony equipment, whether it be TVs,
stereos, walkmans, etc. If Sony sold a product we were interested in,
chances are that we would have bought from them.

Now I would say that they're just one of many in the "decent quality"
sector. I would definitely still class them above the multitude of
bottom-feeder companies, a-la Apex, Konica, Mintek, etc.

However in recent years I haven't seen their quality as being at all
better than many other "decent quality" brands such as Toshiba,
Samsung, Pioneer, etc. For any given product where these companies
compete any one of them might have the best solution for a particular
person, but usually they're all pretty close. The problem here is
that Sony is the most expensive more often than not.

(2) Now, going into the wider population, do you think Sony has fallen
from a premium brand to just one among many?

Well, they are still able to charge a bit of a premium over a lot of
other companies, so that tends to suggest that their name hasn't been
tarnished TOO badly. However I do think that it has taken at least a
bit of a beating.

(Oh, I suspect that Disney, in a different demographic, has undergone
the same sort of slide as Sony over about the same period.)

Perhaps so. I don't know how profits play out, but it would seem that
they are no longer THE name for kids movies anymore. Now Pixar seems
to be putting out as many hits for the young-uns as Disney, and other
smaller players are getting in on the action too.

As for improvement of a brand, it's obviously possible. Apple has
certainly done so in the last few years, and before them I think IBM did

Improvement of brand is only one piece of the puzzle. For example,
with Apple their iMac did quite a bit to generate renewed interest in
the company, but it didn't really translate into dramatically
increased market share. It stopped and reversed the slide somewhat,
but they've been hovering down in the 2% range for a while now.

so. So I think Intel probably could improve their brand quality, but
also that they have reached the point where it won't happen with a
louder volume of ads, that it will actually require a period of
sustained products that are actually better than AMD in some way, to do
so.

Intel's brand name is still rather surprisingly strong IMO, given the
fact that their products have been lagging for about 6 years now. For
this reason I would say that they are doing a pretty good job on the
advertising front.

However advertising will only get them so far with something that most
users aren't actually buying directly. The vast bulk of Intel's (and
AMD's) customer do not buy an Intel or AMD CPU, they buy an HP or Dell
or Lenovo computer. The CPU is just one of many specs that go along
with that computer. Intel's marketing money can get them some play
here, but a lot of customers just aren't willing to pay a premium just
for an Intel CPU in their HP/Dell/whoever if AMD can do a better job
for less.

 

[Tony Hill]

No, the package wasn't ready so they had to put both on the same die.

Exactly, it WASN'T READY! Why wasn't it ready?

AMD had their package ready with the very first Opteron shipped over
two years ago (and they demonstrated their intent to go to dual-core
when the Opteron was first demonstrated back in like 2001 or
thereabouts). Sun, IBM and HP were already well on their way towards
dual-core. Pretty much everyone knew that this was the way of the
future, yet Intel still hasn't arrived to the party.

Keith is right, Intel got caught with their pants down... AGAIN!

 

[George Macdonald]

This question of perceptions is an interesting one.
I remember ten years ago I thought of Sony as a premium brand; when I
had to buy a TV or a VCR my default assumption was to buy Sony (and pay
a little more) unless there were a compelling reason not to.
A series of US-management-style clusterfucks over the last ten years
have, in my mind, completely destroyed that perception. Now if I have to
buy an electronics item either Sony just doesn't make something that
doesn't suck (iPod space), or I'll compare them with someone like
Samsung (flat panel, DVD player), and chances are Samsung will win.
The last Sony thing I bought (a pair of small speakers) while they
looked very cool, were basically all look and no substance; they were
too wimpy in power output to do the job I needed, which didn't do much
to improve my perception of them. When it came to buying some high-end
noise-cancelling headphones, the net reviews agreed: go with Bose and
don't waste your time on Sony.

I never saw Sony as anything but a tube company - their TVs were clearly
better, at least until the Trinitron patent ran out. Their consumer
electronics, especially audio, have always been mediocre, or worse, in
performance and reliability.

My worst experience with them was when I decided to give them a try for a
high-end VCR... not realizing at the time that it had the same notorious
Funai mechanism as every other clone VCR. Ironically that's about the only
part which still works: the FM modulator, which is usually unused, went out
just out of warranty and the tuner went F/U after about 4 years.

My question then is:
(1) The readers of this group are probably more tech savvy than average,
so would you say that you have followed my downward opinion of Sony over
the past 10 yrs?

Yes I agree. Their tubes are now average - the last one I bought, about 2
years ago is "OK" but has some weird non-linear artifacts which are very
obvious in on-sceen tickers, which compress and expand their way across the
bottom of the picture - a problem with the attempt to make a glass flat
screen I think.

(2) Now, going into the wider population, do you think Sony has fallen
from a premium brand to just one among many?

(Oh, I suspect that Disney, in a different demographic, has undergone
the same sort of slide as Sony over about the same period.)

Disney? The largest purveyor of mind-numbing drivel on the planet - always
has been. I can't speak for the <10 years-old group.

For Sony, I think they still have some leverage from past reputation. I
don't think my next TV will be a Sony, after owning 5 of them... but the TV
market is a mess right now, with analog/digital mixes and delivered signals
which void the use of many of the premium features.

As for improvement of a brand, it's obviously possible. Apple has
certainly done so in the last few years, and before them I think IBM did
so. So I think Intel probably could improve their brand quality, but
also that they have reached the point where it won't happen with a
louder volume of ads, that it will actually require a period of
sustained products that are actually better than AMD in some way, to do
so.

I dunno about Apple - there are a lot of very unhappy i-Pod owners,
starting with the crap earphones. As for Intel, they seemed to be claiming
fairly recently that technology & engineering would be given their "head"
but isn't Otellini a marketroid by err, trade? Now we have umm,
"platformisation"... and we now know what the VIIV trademark was for.

 

[dannysdailys]

Quite frankly, it sounds like anyone stupid enough to buy a dual cor
processor from Intel, will find themselves to be orphaned very soon.
No where near enough development has gone into this. Still usin
single off board memory controllers? LOL Talk about a mess. It's
miracle it works. Maybe after they're out a while, we'll find ou
they can't do simple arithmatic, like the pentium couldn't when i
first came out

It's fairly obvious they dropped a very large ball to AMD. So muc
so, even Redmond, dragging it's butt to release a 64 bit Window
still can't bail Intel out

Did you hear the latest? AMD has challenged Intel to a face off. Be
Intel won't be anywhere near a face to face show down

 

[Ketil Malde]

Well it's got to be better than their current stuff

I don't know about forgetting, but if I want a quiet (fanless even?)
living room PC, Pentium M still seems to hold an edge over anything
AMD (too much heat) or VIA (too feeble) have to offer. Even if
somewhat expensive (local prices of ~ USD 250 each for MB and CPU).

Or is it possible to buy a Turion and a MB that will take it?

-k

 

[YKhan]

More anecdotal evidence: I build a few custom systems every
month for friends, friends-of-friends, etc. 37 so far this year.

A year ago about one third of the people wanted me to build P4 or
Xeon systems for them. In the last 5 or 6 months I have not had
one person ask for a P4 or Xeon box: everyone wanted Opterons
or Athlon64s, except for one Pentium M and one AthlonFX.

Opterons & Xeons? Are you building servers for friends of friends?

Yousuf Khan

 

[Felger Carbon]

I don't know about forgetting, but if I want a quiet (fanless even?)
living room PC, Pentium M still seems to hold an edge over anything
AMD (too much heat) or VIA (too feeble) have to offer. Even if
somewhat expensive (local prices of ~ USD 250 each for MB and CPU).

Intel, in their Prescott line, understates the design power and gets
away with it because of thermal throttling. AMD, in their 90nm line,
_understates_ the design power (by a _considerable_ margin in my
Sempron 754 2600+ CPUs) because they're still selling .13u parts for
big bucks. Now, the slow Sempron 754 parts are even available in
AMD64. I recommend them strongly. I know AMD sez 62W "design power",
but you'd need a downhill run and a tailwind and a 40W light bulb
helping to get anywhere near 62W.

 

[Felger Carbon]

CPU).

Intel, in their Prescott line, understates the design power and gets
away with it because of thermal throttling. AMD, in their 90nm line,
_understates_ the design power (by a _considerable_ margin in my
Sempron 754 2600+ CPUs) because they're still selling .13u parts for
big bucks. Now, the slow Sempron 754 parts are even available in
AMD64. I recommend them strongly. I know AMD sez 62W "design power",
but you'd need a downhill run and a tailwind and a 40W light bulb
helping to get anywhere near 62W.

Whoops. I meant AMD _overstates_. Sorry!

 

[Bernd Paysan]

Intel, in their Prescott line, understates the design power and gets
away with it because of thermal throttling. AMD, in their 90nm line,
_understates_ the design power (by a _considerable_ margin in my overstates

Sempron 754 2600+ CPUs) because they're still selling .13u parts for
big bucks. Now, the slow Sempron 754 parts are even available in
AMD64. I recommend them strongly. I know AMD sez 62W "design power",
but you'd need a downhill run and a tailwind and a 40W light bulb
helping to get anywhere near 62W.

"Thermal Design Power" (TDP) is defined as the maximum amount of heat a
cooler has to take away under defined conditions (given die temperature and
air temperature). I.e. you define a temperature difference delta T, and a
power P, and the cooler has to make sure that for a given P the delta T is
met.

AFAIK, AMD didn't change the TDP definition when going to 90nm, but they
lowered the maximum temperature rating for their dies. So in reality, you
have a lower delta T to reach, but with the given TDP (for cooler
designers), they simply overstate the TDP, with the same effect. AMD also
doesn't have thermal throttling, so the TDP really must fit into a
worst-case szenario, while Intel allows programs like CPUburn to exceed the
power - the idea is that in typical use, power bursts like that are short,
and you can prevent damage by throttling.

If you really need the CPU power to run long simulations/encodings/game
sessions/whatever, and you buy Intel, then you also need a cooler that can
handle more than Intel asks.

 

[Pankaj]

This question of perceptions is an interesting one.
I remember ten years ago I thought of Sony as a premium brand; when I
had to buy a TV or a VCR my default assumption was to buy Sony (and pay
a little more) unless there were a compelling reason not to.
A series of US-management-style clusterfucks over the last ten years
have, in my mind, completely destroyed that perception. Now if I have to
buy an electronics item either Sony just doesn't make something that
doesn't suck (iPod space), or I'll compare them with someone like
Samsung (flat panel, DVD player), and chances are Samsung will win.
The last Sony thing I bought (a pair of small speakers) while they
looked very cool, were basically all look and no substance; they were
too wimpy in power output to do the job I needed, which didn't do much
to improve my perception of them. When it came to buying some high-end
noise-cancelling headphones, the net reviews agreed: go with Bose and
don't waste your time on Sony.

I think Sony has been a strong brand, but their quality and business
strategy (iPod space etc) might have gone down lately. For audio, I
never thought they were strong, so I never bought their speakers. Their
TVs, had been great. I have very high regards for Samsung, whose
monitor I bought ~5 years ago, and was very happy. Last year, I wanted
to buy an HDTV, and two brands I considered were Sony (LCD Projection)
and Samsung(DLP). I was leaning towards Samsung to go with, and my wife
was leaning towards Sony (Brand name from past). Samsung looked great
when seen by itself, but we saw them in 4 stores side by side. For 55",
Sony was always a bit more colourful and brighter in all four stores.
Only the 46" Samsung was as lively as the 55" Sony, but we wanted a
little bigger. I asked salesmen to increase brightness on Samsung, but
it still was missing something. Now these could be because monitors
were not calibrated, but I couldnt compare them that way. One salesman
did mention that they had observed the same thing, and just adjusting
brightness did not solve that problem. I did not thoroughly compare any
other brand. I have seen some Samsungs lately and they look good, but
have not compared them side by side. Also, I have Sony CRT 32", and a
19" monitor (CRT) which are excellent too.

My question then is:
(1) The readers of this group are probably more tech savvy than average,
so would you say that you have followed my downward opinion of Sony over
the past 10 yrs?

In my views, its not as strong a brand as it was 10 years ago, but
definitely its a strong brand name. It got diluted by other brands
getting stronger too.

(2) Now, going into the wider population, do you think Sony has fallen
from a premium brand to just one among many?

I think its still a premium brand for general population. Recently I
saw an article that quoted that 98% of consumers would pay a premium
for Sony (in US). (Me too, but how much more will depend..) When I look
at a brand name, I also consider reliability as an equally important
factor. From consumer reports, Sony had always been among the top (Even
now).

(Oh, I suspect that Disney, in a different demographic, has undergone
the same sort of slide as Sony over about the same period.)

Now that their relationship with Pixar is ending, I dont see a lot of
good stuf coming out soon.

As for improvement of a brand, it's obviously possible. Apple has
certainly done so in the last few years, and before them I think IBM did
so. So I think Intel probably could improve their brand quality, but
also that they have reached the point where it won't happen with a
louder volume of ads, that it will actually require a period of
sustained products that are actually better than AMD in some way, to do
so.

From a marketing point of view, I dont know what does it take to create

a brand name, but a lot of advertisement is a part of it. For intel,
its not difficult at all, as AMD has virtualy no ads for consumers. To
create an Intel brand, they dont have to prove them better than AMD.
Brand name is generally the awareness of a name in public and not just
a very narrow select group of people, no matter how much better
informed they may be. M$ hired a VP from P&G to improve the Microsoft
brand name (~10 ? yrs ago) and it still is one of the best brand names
despite the bloody antitrust suit.

 

[Rob Stow]

Opterons & Xeons? Are you building servers for friends of friends?

No: dualie workstations. Some are in the video business and
they love their dual Opteron boxes. Dual Xeon boxes are no
longer wanted - the additional heat (with lower performance) is
really noticeable when you have half a dozen in a crowded office.

And some are home users with no real need for that kind of power

 

[Anton Ertl]

I don't know about forgetting, but if I want a quiet (fanless even?)
living room PC, Pentium M still seems to hold an edge over anything
AMD (too much heat) or VIA (too feeble) have to offer.

Well, my ancient Athlon 64 (Clawhammer C0 stepping, newer steppings
have a faster and cooler low-power mode) is currently idling along
with 800MHz at 44.5 Degrees Celsius, with the fan at a quiet and
leisurely 1300rpm (once the fan reaches about 2000rpm, it starts
contributing audibly to the noise produced by the machine; the machine
is relatively quiet, although probably still too loud for a living
room PC).

When watching DVDs with xine, it stays at 800MHz (about 80% load at
that speed) and the temperature and fan speed is hardly higher.
Playing ogg files produces very little load. Why do you need a
powerful CPU for a living room PC?

The CPU cooler does get loud at full load at full speed, however.

A friend of mine has a Winchester Athlon 64, and that machine uses
somewhat less power (and should produce less noise with the same
cooling) than mine, much less at full load. For more data see
<http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/computer-power-consumption.html>.

Followups to comp.arch.

- anton

 

[CJT]

I don't know about forgetting, but if I want a quiet (fanless even?)
living room PC, Pentium M still seems to hold an edge over anything
AMD (too much heat) or VIA (too feeble) have to offer. Even if
somewhat expensive (local prices of ~ USD 250 each for MB and CPU).

Or is it possible to buy a Turion and a MB that will take it?

-k

I use fanless Sun Rays and a Sun server tucked away out of earshot for
that kind of thing.

 

[George Macdonald]

Maynard Handley wrote:

a brand name, but a lot of advertisement is a part of it. For intel,
its not difficult at all, as AMD has virtualy no ads for consumers. To
create an Intel brand, they dont have to prove them better than AMD.
Brand name is generally the awareness of a name in public and not just
a very narrow select group of people, no matter how much better
informed they may be. M$ hired a VP from P&G to improve the Microsoft
brand name (~10 ? yrs ago) and it still is one of the best brand names
despite the bloody antitrust suit.

AMD's approach recently has been to target collaboration and sponsorship
with high tech activities, mostly in some form of sports. I wonder how
this is panning out: e.g. has the Lance Armstrong/Discovery Team connection
been worth anything to them? How about the Sauber & Ferrari F1 connection?
I don't watch NASCAR but that might be a more worthwhile avenue for their
collaboration/sponsorship efforts in the U.S. market??

 

[Rupert Pigott]

Denon is really putting out
some great stuff on the low end for A/V gear.

I am pretty disillusioned with the whole A/V scene to
tell the truth. The fact that Bose are still in business
and are even sought after speaks volumes for the state
of the market.

The pillocks trying to make content impossible to read
without hugely expensive licenses are not helping either.
They are pushing the small players out of the market and
those guys are the ones who tend to make the better
quality and better sounding gear.

Cheers,
Rupert

 

[keith]

Which means that "dual core" must include an MCM.

Horse-hockey. "Two processors in a package" == dual core, must include
the IBM 3168 of thirty years ago, then. One package (as big as a
box-car), two processors. You Intel apologists are truely amazing.

Are you always this rude?

Rude? Perhaps. I prefer to think of it as terse. You *are* stupid, if
you buy into Intel's garbage.

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-5589445.html

I can post dozens of other references that show that the phrase
"dual
core" can be used to refer to two CPUs in a single package, rather than
on a single die.

Oh, wow! You can post all sorts of Intel propaganda. I'm truely amazed.

 

[keith]

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 19:03:57 -0400, George Macdonald wrote:

AMD's approach recently has been to target collaboration and sponsorship
with high tech activities, mostly in some form of sports. I wonder how
this is panning out: e.g. has the Lance Armstrong/Discovery Team connection

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I think Intel is backing the Frogs. ;-)

 

[keith]

Opterons & Xeons? Are you building servers for friends of friends?

....and what is wrong with Opterons? Had one here for well over a year.
Amazingly the price hasn't dropped.