Concerns with Intel processors

It has been 10 years since i purchased an Intel processor and my system has seen better days.

So i am shopping around designing, developing a new system for my self. It would seem Intel have dragged there ass a bit since 2001 seeing as the Nahalem is a break through arch released 8 years after the Pentium 4 arch.

    [ad]

To me it seems not much has happened from Intel during this time. AMD had developed Hyper-transport well before Intel moving to QPI( quick path interconnect) I still have so many questions unanswered as to why Intel took so long in moving the traditional FSB which clearly has given AMD a running start.

Could it be that Intel wanted to give AMD a running start? is it possible that Intel needed to resolve royalty rights with AMD over this new interconnect? I don’t know, one thing i do know is that over the past 15-20 years we have seen Intel and AMD supposedly head to head but that said. AMD incorporated MMX technology and Intel using aspects of 3Dnow technology. I have a suspicion that Intel and AMD have a collaboration in sharing architecture even though there in competition.

What do i think of Nahalem, well there is a thing. In comparison to price and power and ‘Does it do it for me’ I am not very impressed.

Why?

The Nahalem arch seems a great processor but for the price there asking to scratch the surface of what i want it to do versus price well it scratches the surface for a ‘it will definitely do it’ price and there is no guarantee from Intel it will.  I have gone with the jargon many years ago with Intel’s first Hyperthreading Xeon Pentium 4 class processors but on arrival of these processors they did not perform anywhere near close to Intel’s word.

    [ad]

You guessed it, that kind of leaves me not able to trust what Intel says. Baring in mind it has taken them over 5 years to come out with a processor that works on today’s market as good as the Pentium 4 did. It must be said that the performance of the Nahalem arch is a wow, I just thought i would put that in there.

What concerns me is that the DP Xeon which is set and built for the development workstation/server market and a core i7 950 seems to par to its performance. Of course a DP system is a different to a desktop core i7 but in overall comparison the performance boost is not double the compute power needed for a workstation. So why is its price triple that of a desktop system. As i mentioned above performance to price is way off.

In 2006 Sun Microsystems developed the very first 8 core 256 thread processor which was later re-programed to 64 threads all of which were individually assignable threads by the developer. This still runs in as a 4 socket system making 8×4=32 physical cores and 64×4= 256 individual threads. A big argument here is the power this system uses well it runs on a 1.6kw or 1600w power supply unit which is a very common wattage used in a normal gamers desktop unit. with a single processor and graphics card.

Intel are still to release a 8 core processor and even looking at there road-map each core only has 2 threads which can NOT be assigned by the user/developer. It should be said here that late 2006 start 2007 Intel and Sun Microsoystems started a collaboration on server products due to the Ultrasparc processor.

Further more concerns in this area is that Sun Microsystems managed to squeeze 8 cores 256 threads, two PCIe gen2 interfaces two 10gbe’s all on a 95nm die. Intel told us the Nahalem arch would be scaled to 8 cores yet they are scaling the first 6 cores onto a 32nm die, of course not including the 6 cores used on the 7400 MP processors. Due to be released soon is a Xeon MP Nahalem 8 core processor which clearly indicates to us Intel could have made an 8 core Nahalem 3 years ago, but did not.

Proof that Intel lies to its customers misleading them to buy an older model for latest prices. so 8 core Nahalem on 45nm should mean at least an 8 core Westemere on 32nm.

A few years ago the difference of the Xeon enterprise and workstation Xeon was MP for enterprise and DP for workstation or mid server. Put simply if an 8 core MP processor was available then a 8 core DP processor was available allowing Workstation users to develop on the same arch that they new would be portable to the MP systems.

I don’t know maybe i am reading into it too much. one things for certain, Intel’s marketing for there processors is ripping the consumer off with lies and overpriced markups.

A question for the road.

Would you pay thousands on a product knowing that for the same price you could have double the quantity?

Note: All trade names used above are rights of there prospective owners.

    [ad]