Intel leaving low-end chipset business?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

It seems Intel is running tight on low-end chipset capacity at its
older fabs, and is going to concentrate on the high-end Centrino
chipsets and stuff. That means all of the Celerons will be left high
and dry (can't run a CPU without chipset -- yet). It's not likely that
the Taiwanese chipset houses will be able to fill the void that
quickly, especially when Intel has been driving them out of this
business for the last several years. And what are people going to do,
run a Celeron on an Nvidia Nforce board, where the chipset costs more
than the CPU?

If Intel dumps low end chipsets, it leaves a big hole
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25109

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 3 Aug 2005 08:16:11 -0700, "Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote:

>It seems Intel is running tight on low-end chipset capacity at its
>older fabs, and is going to concentrate on the high-end Centrino
>chipsets and stuff. That means all of the Celerons will be left high
>and dry (can't run a CPU without chipset -- yet). It's not likely that
>the Taiwanese chipset houses will be able to fill the void that
>quickly, especially when Intel has been driving them out of this
>business for the last several years. And what are people going to do,
>run a Celeron on an Nvidia Nforce board, where the chipset costs more
>than the CPU?
>
>If Intel dumps low end chipsets, it leaves a big hole
>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25109
>
> Yousuf Khan

If the Centrino stuff is where the money is at for Intel then it seems
like a no brainer, and no doubt not the first time Intel left their
customers high and dry either.

Ed
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 3 Aug 2005 08:16:11 -0700, "Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote:

>It seems Intel is running tight on low-end chipset capacity at its
>older fabs, and is going to concentrate on the high-end Centrino
>chipsets and stuff. That means all of the Celerons will be left high
>and dry (can't run a CPU without chipset -- yet). It's not likely that
>the Taiwanese chipset houses will be able to fill the void that
>quickly, especially when Intel has been driving them out of this
>business for the last several years. And what are people going to do,
>run a Celeron on an Nvidia Nforce board, where the chipset costs more
>than the CPU?
>
>If Intel dumps low end chipsets, it leaves a big hole
>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25109

Message to Dell: "Quit dumping our 'valuable IP' - we can't sell our
silicon below cost"?????

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123082171.911883.264690@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> It seems Intel is running tight on low-end chipset capacity at its
> older fabs, and is going to concentrate on the high-end Centrino
> chipsets and stuff. That means all of the Celerons will be left high
> and dry (can't run a CPU without chipset -- yet). It's not likely
that
> the Taiwanese chipset houses will be able to fill the void that
> quickly, especially when Intel has been driving them out of this
> business for the last several years. And what are people going to
do,
> run a Celeron on an Nvidia Nforce board, where the chipset costs
more
> than the CPU?

Gee, Yousuf, you've spotted an enormous hole in Intel's strategy. If
people can't buy reasonably-priced mobos for their Celerons, then they
won't buy Celerons. Intel apparently has not considered this. One of
us ought to write Intel to alert them to this oversight. We wouldn't
want folks who would otherwise have bought Intel turning elsewhere -
Via for example - for their CPUs. And poor Dell will have to close
down half of their production line.

This is a tragedy.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Yousuf Khan wrote:
> It seems Intel is running tight on low-end chipset capacity at its
> older fabs, and is going to concentrate on the high-end Centrino
> chipsets and stuff. That means all of the Celerons will be left high
> and dry (can't run a CPU without chipset -- yet). It's not likely that
> the Taiwanese chipset houses will be able to fill the void that
> quickly, especially when Intel has been driving them out of this
> business for the last several years. And what are people going to do,
> run a Celeron on an Nvidia Nforce board, where the chipset costs more
> than the CPU?

Just how many people buy a system based on the relative cost of the
components? Of course they could drop the Celeron entirely, drop the
price on the Celeron-M and the chips sets, thus offering lower power and
higher performance at the same price and putting pressure on all the
other chipset makers.

How's that for totally baseless rumor? Probably as likely as the first
one, actually. I can believe (just barely) a price increase to match
supply and demand, but exit a market segment I can't. Drop a new piece
into the market with a price change? That I actually could believe.
>
> If Intel dumps low end chipsets, it leaves a big hole
> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25109

The sky is falling...

--
bill davidsen
SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Just how many people buy a system based on the relative cost of the
> components?

I'd hope pretty much every OEM or whiteboxer out there?

> Of course they could drop the Celeron entirely, drop the
> price on the Celeron-M and the chips sets, thus offering lower power and
> higher performance at the same price and putting pressure on all the
> other chipset makers.
>
> How's that for totally baseless rumor? Probably as likely as the first
> one, actually. I can believe (just barely) a price increase to match
> supply and demand, but exit a market segment I can't. Drop a new piece
> into the market with a price change? That I actually could believe.

Whoa, where does this "baseless" rumour stuff come from? It's a rumour,
but not baseless. Intel did admit to chipset shortages in its last
quarterly report. Even though it's got five 300-mm wafer plants in
operation, and another one on the way. It produces all of its chipsets
at an older 200-mm fab, and apparently that's the fab that's maxed out
nowadays. So if it's trying to relieve some pressure from the chipset
plant, this would make some sense.

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123082171.911883.264690@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> It seems Intel is running tight on low-end chipset capacity at its
> older fabs, and is going to concentrate on the high-end Centrino
> chipsets and stuff. That means all of the Celerons will be left high
> and dry (can't run a CPU without chipset -- yet). It's not likely that
> the Taiwanese chipset houses will be able to fill the void that
> quickly, especially when Intel has been driving them out of this
> business for the last several years. And what are people going to do,
> run a Celeron on an Nvidia Nforce board, where the chipset costs more
> than the CPU?
>
> If Intel dumps low end chipsets, it leaves a big hole
> http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=25109


Earth to Yousuf ... to the other companies that make chipsets
this is called ... wait for it ... "opportunity" ... right?

--

... Hank

http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson
http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Hank Oredson wrote:
> Earth to Yousuf ... to the other companies that make chipsets
> this is called ... wait for it ... "opportunity" ... right?

Outer Space to Hank, who's going to build all of those extra chipsets
for the chipset houses? They've probably already made their capacity
decisions based on the tiny scraps of business they are scrounging out
now. They'd have to get their foundries to crank out more product than
they originally planned for.

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote in message
news:gPgIe.5651$z91.625527@news20.bellglobal.com...

> Outer Space to Hank, who's going to build all of those extra chipsets for
> the chipset houses? They've probably already made their capacity decisions
> based on the tiny scraps of business they are scrounging out now. They'd
> have to get their foundries to crank out more product than they originally
> planned for.
>
> Yousuf Khan

There's this thing you probably haven't heard of, it's called money. It
tends to cause foundries to produce your product instead of others.

DS
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote in message
news:gPgIe.5651$z91.625527@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Hank Oredson wrote:
>> Earth to Yousuf ... to the other companies that make chipsets
>> this is called ... wait for it ... "opportunity" ... right?
>
> Outer Space to Hank, who's going to build all of those extra chipsets for
> the chipset houses? They've probably already made their capacity decisions
> based on the tiny scraps of business they are scrounging out now. They'd
> have to get their foundries to crank out more product than they originally
> planned for.


1. Exactly.
2. ...
3. ...
4. Profit!

Supply, demand, scarcity ... pretty simple actually.

--

... Hank

http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson
http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

David Schwartz wrote:
> There's this thing you probably haven't heard of, it's called money. It
> tends to cause foundries to produce your product instead of others.

There's also this thing called being capacity constrained which money
won't resolve right away.

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote in message
news:BppIe.5756$z91.669116@news20.bellglobal.com...

> David Schwartz wrote:

>> There's this thing you probably haven't heard of, it's called money.
>> It tends to cause foundries to produce your product instead of others.

> There's also this thing called being capacity constrained which money
> won't resolve right away.

Yes, it will. If the price of a particular product rises enough, heaven
and earth will be moved to make more of it. The point is, the more of a
shortage there is and the more prices rise, the more capacity will,
miraculously, be found.

DS
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote in message
news:BppIe.5756$z91.669116@news20.bellglobal.com...
> David Schwartz wrote:
>> There's this thing you probably haven't heard of, it's called money.
>> It tends to cause foundries to produce your product instead of others.
>
> There's also this thing called being capacity constrained which money
> won't resolve right away.


That's a real giggle.
Why not just admit this particular troll was a bit too far off-the-wall.
On to the next troll.

--

... Hank

http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson
http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

These are supposed to be value-priced parts, how much extra are they
going to pay to get them, before it makes no sense bother with it? At
some point it becomes easier just to buy the higher-end parts.

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

You are perfectly free to never read another word if you like. No one
is forcing you to keep informed, dimwit.

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123259091.555921.3150@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> You are perfectly free to never read another word if you like. No one
> is forcing you to keep informed, dimwit.


I am also perfectly free to comment on the "information" you post.
Nobody is forcing you to read my comments.

--

... Hank

http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson
http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Hank Oredson" <horedson@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7YMIe.1847$WD.907@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1123259091.555921.3150@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > You are perfectly free to never read another word if you like. No
one
> > is forcing you to keep informed, dimwit.
>
> I am also perfectly free to comment on the "information" you post.
> Nobody is forcing you to read my comments.

Speech is free. Civility is priceless. ;-) ;-)
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > I'd hope pretty much every OEM or whiteboxer out there?
>
> The OEM cares about the total, and building your own is less likely to
> involve the bottom end stuff, you can buy cheaper than build in most
> cases. The total cost is an issue, but that's not was I said or meant.

It's only these builders that'll care.

> > Whoa, where does this "baseless" rumour stuff come from? It's a rumour,
> > but not baseless. Intel did admit to chipset shortages in its last
> > quarterly report. Even though it's got five 300-mm wafer plants in
> > operation, and another one on the way. It produces all of its chipsets
> > at an older 200-mm fab, and apparently that's the fab that's maxed out
> > nowadays. So if it's trying to relieve some pressure from the chipset
> > plant, this would make some sense.
>
> If that starts a rumor that Intel is dropping the Celeron totally, it's
> baseless, because I just pulled it out of the air. It might make sense,
> but I had no data when I said it. If that doesn't qualify as baseless
> what does? ;-)
>
> As a former manager used to say, "I made that up."

No, as I said, it's not baseless, Intel is definitely saying they are
having trouble producing enough chipsets themselves. That's completely
established. The only rumour here is what Intel is going to do to
alleviate the situation, and in this rumour they're going to alleviate
the situation by cutting their less profitable chipsets. HOw's that for
a "grounded" rumour?

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Del Cecchi wrote:
> "Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1123259007.812644.296140@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > These are supposed to be value-priced parts, how much extra are they
> > going to pay to get them, before it makes no sense bother with it? At
> > some point it becomes easier just to buy the higher-end parts.
> >
> > Yousuf Khan
> >
> Or offload the manufacturing to tsmc/chartered/etc

That's exactly where they are produced right now. Only Intel makes
their own chipsets, everybody else goes through one of these contract
manufacturers. When they're already being produced at
tsmc/chartered/etc. who have other customers they are committed to
already, who takes precedence? VIA & SiS because they can sell a few
thousand more cheap chipsets; or do they put off Broadcom, Altera,
Nvidia, or whoever else is also their customers?

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Yousuf Khan wrote:
> Bill Davidsen wrote:
>
>> Just how many people buy a system based on the relative cost of the
>> components?
>
>
> I'd hope pretty much every OEM or whiteboxer out there?

The OEM cares about the total, and building your own is less likely to
involve the bottom end stuff, you can buy cheaper than build in most
cases. The total cost is an issue, but that's not was I said or meant.
>
>> Of course they could drop the Celeron entirely, drop the price on the
>> Celeron-M and the chips sets, thus offering lower power and higher
>> performance at the same price and putting pressure on all the other
>> chipset makers.
>>
>> How's that for totally baseless rumor? Probably as likely as the first
>> one, actually. I can believe (just barely) a price increase to match
>> supply and demand, but exit a market segment I can't. Drop a new piece
>> into the market with a price change? That I actually could believe.
>
>
> Whoa, where does this "baseless" rumour stuff come from? It's a rumour,
> but not baseless. Intel did admit to chipset shortages in its last
> quarterly report. Even though it's got five 300-mm wafer plants in
> operation, and another one on the way. It produces all of its chipsets
> at an older 200-mm fab, and apparently that's the fab that's maxed out
> nowadays. So if it's trying to relieve some pressure from the chipset
> plant, this would make some sense.

If that starts a rumor that Intel is dropping the Celeron totally, it's
baseless, because I just pulled it out of the air. It might make sense,
but I had no data when I said it. If that doesn't qualify as baseless
what does? ;-)

As a former manager used to say, "I made that up."

--
bill davidsen
SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123259007.812644.296140@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> These are supposed to be value-priced parts, how much extra are they
> going to pay to get them, before it makes no sense bother with it? At
> some point it becomes easier just to buy the higher-end parts.
>
> Yousuf Khan
>
Or offload the manufacturing to tsmc/chartered/etc
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"YKhan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1123290359.041864.297230@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Del Cecchi wrote:
>> "Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1123259007.812644.296140@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> > These are supposed to be value-priced parts, how much extra are they
>> > going to pay to get them, before it makes no sense bother with it?
>> > At
>> > some point it becomes easier just to buy the higher-end parts.
>> >
>> > Yousuf Khan
>> >
>> Or offload the manufacturing to tsmc/chartered/etc
>
> That's exactly where they are produced right now. Only Intel makes
> their own chipsets, everybody else goes through one of these contract
> manufacturers. When they're already being produced at
> tsmc/chartered/etc. who have other customers they are committed to
> already, who takes precedence? VIA & SiS because they can sell a few
> thousand more cheap chipsets; or do they put off Broadcom, Altera,
> Nvidia, or whoever else is also their customers?
>
> Yousuf Khan
>
You make the assumption that the independent foundries are running at
full capacity. I would guess that is not true.

Del
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Del Cecchi wrote:
> You make the assumption that the independent foundries are running at
> full capacity. I would guess that is not true.
>

It's not my guess, it's the premise that these articles are about.

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote in message
news:8OqdnfrJFeGkpmjfRVn-jw@rogers.com...
> Del Cecchi wrote:
>> You make the assumption that the independent foundries are running at
>> full capacity. I would guess that is not true.
>>
>
> It's not my guess, it's the premise that these articles are about.


The proof of said premise being the recent huge spike
in in price of semiconductors, particularly chipsets.

--

... Hank

http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson
http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On 5 Aug 2005 18:05:59 -0700, "YKhan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote:

>Del Cecchi wrote:
>> "Yousuf Khan" <yjkhan@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1123259007.812644.296140@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> > These are supposed to be value-priced parts, how much extra are they
>> > going to pay to get them, before it makes no sense bother with it? At
>> > some point it becomes easier just to buy the higher-end parts.
>> >
>> > Yousuf Khan
>> >
>> Or offload the manufacturing to tsmc/chartered/etc
>
>That's exactly where they are produced right now. Only Intel makes
>their own chipsets, everybody else goes through one of these contract
>manufacturers. When they're already being produced at
>tsmc/chartered/etc. who have other customers they are committed to
>already, who takes precedence? VIA & SiS because they can sell a few
>thousand more cheap chipsets; or do they put off Broadcom, Altera,
>Nvidia, or whoever else is also their customers?

While we may see some short-term supply problems, the laws of supply
and demand will tend to correct things fairly quickly. TSMC,
Chartered, UMC, et al. are in the process of building more capacity
all the time. SiS doesn't even have to worry about this because,
unless something has changed recently, they still have their own fab.

Simply put, there is a LOT of semiconductor fab space out there. At
any given time there are dozens of companies going through upswings or
downswings in demand. It may take a few months for companies like VIA
to get a bit of extra fab space, but not much more. Fortunately it's
not like Intel will immediately run out of chipsets on one given day,
there will be LOTS of inventory floating through the channels for a
few months.

As I said, we might see a short-term supply issue that will result in
some odd pricing (ie low-end stuff going up to be only a few dollars
cheaper than higher-end stuff), but it will be correctly quickly
enough.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom