Report: Intel to Increase Ivy Bridge Production Share to 70%

[Guest]

Intel's Sandy Bridge processors are being quickly phased out as Intel ramps up its 22 nm Ivy Bridge generation.

Report: Intel to Increase Ivy Bridge Production Share to 70% : Read more

 

[noobzilla771]

Sadly, there's no need for Intel to rush in the new chips since Sandy Bridge pretty much still owns AMD in terms of cpu performance. AMD, whatever happened to you

 

[dark_knight33]

[citation][nom]noobzilla771[/nom]Sadly, there's no need for Intel to rush in the new chips since Sandy Bridge pretty much still owns AMD in terms of cpu performance. AMD, whatever happened to you[/citation]

Innovation shouldn't be dictated solely by competition. While competition did drive Intel to dump netburst and create it's successful Core2 line, if competition were the only factor propelling new CPU technology, we might never have gotten out of the 486 days.

 

[InvalidError]

Intel still needs to compete against itself (and a plethora of ARM-based devices) if it wants to continue selling chips. If they stop improving enough to give people a convincing sales pitch, nobody will bother upgrading anymore and Intel's PC-centric revenues will crash.

Regardless of what happens to AMD, Intel still needs to keep moving forward if they do not want to risk a market take-over by ARM64/Android later in the office and HTPC markets.

 

[phate]

[citation][nom]noobzilla771[/nom]Sadly, there's no need for Intel to rush in the new chips since Sandy Bridge pretty much still owns AMD in terms of cpu performance. AMD, whatever happened to you[/citation]

Fortunately - for now - what this article tells us is that Intel is still being aggressive in updating their lineup. And seeing as how low power Haswell is Intel's strategy for entering the mobile market, it looks like AMD is irrelevant either way.

Intel has to stay on it's toes to try and combat ARM regardless of AMD's poor showing.

 

[andle riddum]

Still no price drops...I'm a sad panda

 

[luciferano]

[citation][nom]hydac7[/nom]AMD hello helloo helooo , anybody there? .. echo echoo echooo , hmm guess it's empty over there .. And when is Intel gonna drop the prices a bit ? huh , ? .. sigh[/citation]

Intel has been dropping prices (albeit slowly) and AMD is improving. They'll catch up if Intel doesn't keep improving, so Intel will keep improving too.

 

[sherlockwing]

I wonder with Intel shutting down Sandy line will we get binned chips for Ivy like i5-3590K(3.5Ghz) & i7-3790K(3.6Ghz) much like i5-2550K & i7-2700K which Intel pushed out around this time last year.

 

[luciferano]

[citation][nom]sherlockwing[/nom]I wonder with Intel shutting down Sandy line will we get binned chips for Ivy like i5-3590K(3.5Ghz) & i7-3790K(3.6Ghz) much like i5-2550K & i7-2700K which Intel pushed out around this time last year.[/citation]

2700K and such might have launched about a year ago, but Ivy launched in the end of April whereas Sandy launched in January, so assuming a year between launch and better binned launches, we're a few months off.

 

[thecolorblue]

intel. monopoly. bad. for. consumers.

 

[ozvip3r]

So what you're telling us is that sandy bridge and Haskell are die shrinks where as ivy bridge was a new architecture, lol!

 

[agnickolov]

[citation][nom]ozvip3r[/nom]So what you're telling us is that sandy bridge and Haskell are die shrinks where as ivy bridge was a new architecture, lol![/citation]
No, quite the opposite. Intel was due to introduce the next architecture this year, but they are behind on their promise. This is exactly what the article says too, but I admit it could have elaborated a bit...

 

[silverblue]

Considering the pressure for the PC market to regain traction and produce appealing devices for Windows 8, anything less than a 75 percent share for Ivy Bridge by the end of the year would be disappointing.

Maybe, maybe not. Intel make Medfield, Atom and Itanium CPUs as well as Ivy Bridge.

 

[maddy143ded]

I don't know what they mean by discontinuing a product line,
core2duo/quad series is still available in abundance in my city. wasn't it discontinued some 4-5 years back?

 

[silverblue]

They mean not producing it anymore. Those 45nm fabs were most likely churning out Atoms well after Core 2 ceased to exist.

 

[apone]

[citation][nom]InvalidError[/nom]Intel still needs to compete against itself (and a plethora of ARM-based devices) if it wants to continue selling chips. If they stop improving enough to give people a convincing sales pitch, nobody will bother upgrading anymore and Intel's PC-centric revenues will crash.Regardless of what happens to AMD, Intel still needs to keep moving forward if they do not want to risk a market take-over by ARM64/Android later in the office and HTPC markets.[/citation]

Not sure where you got your business education from but there's that old saying that "competition breeds innovation." Do you honestly think Silicon Valley would be a large community of R&D and tech companies relentlessly trying to outdo each other in terms of innovation if there was only 1 company there? The lack of competition invites complacency.

The reason Intel dumped Netburst was because they realized the Pentium 4 (and its similar Pentium D) architecture had become ridiculously antequated and simply raising the clock speed was not only yielding marginal performance increases but operating temperature was getting out of control hot. At the same time, Intel realized AMD was outgunning them by providing cheaper CPU's that run almost as fast, if not faster and cooler, than their P4 and PD's chips and had to go back to the drawing board.

Regarding the 486 days, I think that was the heyday of CPU's as there was no shortage of competition which included IBM (80XXX series), Motorola, (68000 series), Cyrix, NEC, Chips & Technologies, and of course AMD.

 

[apone]

Oops, meant to reply to Dark Knight_33:

"Innovation shouldn't be dictated solely by competition. While competition did drive Intel to dump netburst and create it's successful Core2 line, if competition were the only factor propelling new CPU technology, we might never have gotten out of the 486 days."

 

[f-14]

[citation][nom]maddy143ded[/nom]I don't know what they mean by discontinuing a product line, core2duo/quad series is still available in abundance in my city. wasn't it discontinued some 4-5 years back?[/citation]
you live in india, the price in rupees for an i7-3770 would be to staggering for most of your countrymen, i do not mean any disrespect, just that economically the demand for those chips else where in the world has fallen significantly enough to make them very appealing price wise to most computer consumers in your piece of the world. they still sell very well on ebay in america at $40 for a core2duo E8400 and $175 for a core2quad 9550 the cheapest i have found i7-3770k is just under $300 tho.

 

[mrdowntownkiller]

totally worth it

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]thecolorblue[/nom]intel. monopoly. bad. for. consumers.[/citation]

Not really. Intel, in a monopoly, would be crushed by governments worldwide with anti-trust lawsuits. They'd be fined for billions and then be force to pay additional billions to get AMD back on track.

Furthermore, Intel, like many companies in similar situations, simply can't afford to have ridiculous pricing permanently. If they price things badly for a few years, the majority of people will stop buying and high prices or not, Intel will be hurting. Programmers would respond by making more and more optimal code because they'd have no choice to do otherwise, hurting Intel even more as the current AMD FX CPUs get better and better with more well-threaded coding, as does even Intel's current CPUs to a far lesser extent. AMD or other companies either based on AMD or replacing them would be on the rise and Intel would have no choice but to improve.

Basically, Intel must keep going or else they'd fail. They can't stagnate price/performance drops for more than a few years before they start to feel the hurt.

 

[proffet]

Sadly, there's no need for Intel to rush in the new chips since Sandy Bridge pretty much still owns AMD in terms of cpu performance. AMD, whatever happened to you

Intel has been dropping prices (albeit slowly) and AMD is improving. They'll catch up if Intel doesn't keep improving, so Intel will keep improving too.

intel. monopoly. bad. for. consumers.

1.) just sold my last AMD unit (980BE + 990X) maybe one day I'll be back.
I remember when they stopped Nehalem to make way for SB.

2.) Intel could stop now with development and AMD will still need 5+ years to catch-up.
also in-store deals in the US, I just went to Fry s and price-matched for a i5-3570K $192 with tax out the door.

3.) I think the government will step in and do something before AMD actually stops operations
I don't think they will get to that point anyways, not with APU's and HD Radeon side of things.
the days of monopolies (this major) like the AT&T vs Bell Systems are far over.
consumers will eventually rise-up and a voice will be heard that leads to governmental call for action.

Report: Intel to Increase Ivy Bridge Production Share to 70% : Read more
4.) Intel prices will drop.!