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.
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.
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.
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.