Intel Shelton processor

http://arstechnica.com/news/posts/20040811-4091.html

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17790

Apparently it's based on a Celeron 90nm running at 1Ghz with no cache
(presumably no L2 cache rather than L1). I assume that this means that it's
a P4-based Celeron rather than some P-M-based Celeron. Designed to take on
AMD Sempron in emerging markets.

This takes us back to the old days of Celeron when it was based on the
Pentium 2 and
*also* had no cache.

Yousuf Khan

--
Humans: contact me at ykhan at rogers dot com
Spambots: just reply to this email address ;-)

Yousuf Khan wrote:
http://arstechnica.com/news/posts/20040811-4091.html

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17790

Apparently it's based on a Celeron 90nm running at 1Ghz with no cache
(presumably no L2 cache rather than L1). I assume that this means that it's
a P4-based Celeron rather than some P-M-based Celeron. Designed to take on
AMD Sempron in emerging markets.

How could you possibly assume that? At 1GHZ it would be running at 1/3
of the Celeron speed. This would not compete at all with Sempron, which
is not so crippled. 1GHz Celeron with no cache would under-perform my
PIII/500. Not to mention all the press about end-of-lifing Pentium 4's
Netburst architecture. On the other hand, a 1GHz Celeron-M would run at
2/3 of the Pentium-M frequency, which keeps it almost competitive
(except for the lack of cache). And remember intel keeps saying that
Pentium-M is the wave of the future. My money is on a cacheless Dothan
chip. Imagine all those dead dies revived by cutting the faulty 2M
cache. It's a yield dream!

Alex
--
My words are my own. They represent no other; they belong to no other.
Don't read anything into them or you may be required to compensate me
for violation of copyright. (I do not speak for my employer.)

Alex Johnson wrote:
Apparently it's based on a Celeron 90nm running at 1Ghz with no cache
(presumably no L2 cache rather than L1). I assume that this means
that it's a P4-based Celeron rather than some P-M-based Celeron.
Designed to take on AMD Sempron in emerging markets.

How could you possibly assume that?

Well, because they mentioned that it was based on the "_older_ Celeron core
using 90nm". The older 90nm Celerons are P4-based, I believe.

At 1GHZ it would be running at
1/3 of the Celeron speed. This would not compete at all with
Sempron, which is not so crippled. 1GHz Celeron with no cache would
under-perform my PIII/500.

No argument there about the performance, but I assume that Intel really
doesn't care too much about performance since it's meant for "emerging"
markets, and that it's going to rely solely on brand-name here. It seems to
be remarkably similar to the approach Microsoft is taking with its
third-world-busting Windows XP Starter Edition (XP lite); it's taking out a
lot of functionality with it, such as file and printer sharing, multiple
user logins, etc. Features that you or I would assume is just basic to any
computer system, being sacrificed completely for economy. I also think these
sacrificed basic features will also result in no one in the developed world
wanting to touch these products, thus leaving the developed world markets
available only for Intel's higher-margin existing products. I think Intel's
strategy is actually quite clever: when AMD marketed third-world Durons
starting a couple of years ago, they were desirable enough that the
developed world wanted them to a certain extent too -- they simply weren't
crippled enough.

Microsoft will market a crippled Windows XP in the third world to combat
lost revenue due to piracy. Intel will market a crippled Celeron to combat
any possible inroads that AMD and VIA might have in these markets. In both
cases, you get two very well known brand names, i.e. Intel and/or Microsoft.
Branding is often very important in the third-world where incomes are low,
but the desire to have famous western gear for bragging purposes are very
high.

Not to mention all the press about
end-of-lifing Pentium 4's Netburst architecture. On the other hand,
a 1GHz Celeron-M would run at 2/3 of the Pentium-M frequency, which
keeps it almost competitive (except for the lack of cache). And
remember intel keeps saying that Pentium-M is the wave of the future.
My money is on a cacheless Dothan chip. Imagine all those dead dies
revived by cutting the faulty 2M cache. It's a yield dream!

A Pentium-M-based Celeron would be much more competitive than a Pentium
4-based Celeron, true. But if we assume that the Pentium-M is the latest
evolution of the P6 architecture, which started with the Pentium Pro and
went upto the Pentium 3 previously, then looking back at the first Celerons
which were P6-derived (cacheless Pentium 2's running at around 300Mhz), then
they weren't very competive in that form either. P6 might be less
cache-dependent than P4, but it still needs some cache. I don't think a
cacheless P6 is going to be any more or less competitive than cacheless P4.
Now put a small amount of cache (let's say 64K) on a P6, and it will
immediately come to life, which you can't say about a P4-based system. But
at zero K cache, neither P6 nor P4 will have any life in them.

Yousuf Khan

Yousuf Khan wrote:

Alex Johnson wrote:
Apparently it's based on a Celeron 90nm running at 1Ghz with no cache
(presumably no L2 cache rather than L1). I assume that this means
that it's a P4-based Celeron rather than some P-M-based Celeron.
Designed to take on AMD Sempron in emerging markets.

How could you possibly assume that?

Well, because they mentioned that it was based on the "_older_ Celeron core
using 90nm". The older 90nm Celerons are P4-based, I believe.

At 1GHZ it would be running at
1/3 of the Celeron speed. This would not compete at all with
Sempron, which is not so crippled. 1GHz Celeron with no cache would
under-perform my PIII/500.

No argument there about the performance, but I assume that Intel really
doesn't care too much about performance since it's meant for "emerging"
markets, and that it's going to rely solely on brand-name here. It seems to
be remarkably similar to the approach Microsoft is taking with its
third-world-busting Windows XP Starter Edition (XP lite); it's taking out a
lot of functionality with it, such as file and printer sharing, multiple
user logins, etc. Features that you or I would assume is just basic to any
computer system, being sacrificed completely for economy.

I don't need those features, and would gladly do without them to get the
next version of Windows at half price. Windows is too large anyway, and
a scaled down version would be nice.

I also think these
sacrificed basic features will also result in no one in the developed world
wanting to touch these products,

They will love them if the price is much lower.

thus leaving the developed world markets
available only for Intel's higher-margin existing products.

Not quite. AMD will get plenty of market share.

I think Intel's
strategy is actually quite clever: when AMD marketed third-world Durons
starting a couple of years ago, they were desirable enough that the
developed world wanted them to a certain extent too -- they simply weren't
crippled enough.

Microsoft will market a crippled Windows XP in the third world to combat
lost revenue due to piracy. Intel will market a crippled Celeron to combat
any possible inroads that AMD and VIA might have in these markets. In both
cases, you get two very well known brand names, i.e. Intel and/or Microsoft.
Branding is often very important in the third-world where incomes are low,

That is funny.


but the desire to have famous western gear for bragging purposes are very
high.

It is a computer, not a fashion accessory. Even for notebooks that are
carried around, people see the name on the case, and not the name
on the cpu as some is in public using the notebook.



Not to mention all the press about
end-of-lifing Pentium 4's Netburst architecture. On the other hand,
a 1GHz Celeron-M would run at 2/3 of the Pentium-M frequency, which
keeps it almost competitive (except for the lack of cache). And
remember intel keeps saying that Pentium-M is the wave of the future.
My money is on a cacheless Dothan chip. Imagine all those dead dies
revived by cutting the faulty 2M cache. It's a yield dream!

A Pentium-M-based Celeron would be much more competitive than a Pentium
4-based Celeron, true. But if we assume that the Pentium-M is the latest
evolution of the P6 architecture, which started with the Pentium Pro and
went upto the Pentium 3 previously, then looking back at the first Celerons
which were P6-derived (cacheless Pentium 2's running at around 300Mhz), then
they weren't very competive in that form either. P6 might be less
cache-dependent than P4, but it still needs some cache. I don't think a
cacheless P6 is going to be any more or less competitive than cacheless P4.
Now put a small amount of cache (let's say 64K) on a P6, and it will
immediately come to life, which you can't say about a P4-based system. But
at zero K cache, neither P6 nor P4 will have any life in them.

Intel needs to sufficiently cripple the Celerons so they don't cannibalize
Pentium 4 sales too much.



Yousuf Khan

JK wrote:
I don't need those features, and would gladly do without them to get
the next version of Windows at half price. Windows is too large
anyway, and
a scaled down version would be nice.

I'd say a good price for Windows would be $10, maybe $15 at the uppermost.
That's Canadian dollars I'm talking about too. Pretty much nothing more than
the cost of the CD and its case. Since Microsoft doesn't provide tech
support anyways, therefore that's all Windows is worth.

It's still a little high for the third world, but I'm sure they can sell it
for $1 to $3 over there (locally packaged). They'll be providing employment
for a local workforce of CD stamping plants.

thus leaving the developed world markets
available only for Intel's higher-margin existing products.

Not quite. AMD will get plenty of market share.

We were only talking about Intel's own sales alone.

but the desire to have famous western gear for bragging purposes are
very high.

It is a computer, not a fashion accessory. Even for notebooks that are
carried around, people see the name on the case, and not the name
on the cpu as some is in public using the notebook.

No, it is quite definitely a fashion accessory. The need for computers in
the third world are very low.

As for the name on the case, haven't you seen the "Intel Inside" and the
"Designed for Microsoft Windows XP" logos? They are noticeable. In fact,
these days in the third world, you can get away with not having a famous
brand-name box manufacturer, as long as you have at least the famous CPU or
OS manufacturers also prominently displayed. As long as a neighbour sees a
famous brand name of some sort somewhere, you're spared the shame.

Intel needs to sufficiently cripple the Celerons so they don't
cannibalize Pentium 4 sales too much.

Which a cacheless Pentium 4/Celeron would achieve. You get a famous
brandname and logo, so what if you barely know how to use the thing and
really have no need for one?

Yousuf Khan

Yousuf Khan wrote:

JK wrote:
I don't need those features, and would gladly do without them to get
the next version of Windows at half price. Windows is too large
anyway, and
a scaled down version would be nice.

I'd say a good price for Windows would be $10, maybe $15 at the uppermost.
That's Canadian dollars I'm talking about too. Pretty much nothing more than
the cost of the CD and its case. Since Microsoft doesn't provide tech
support anyways, therefore that's all Windows is worth.

It's still a little high for the third world, but I'm sure they can sell it
for $1 to $3 over there (locally packaged). They'll be providing employment
for a local workforce of CD stamping plants.

thus leaving the developed world markets
available only for Intel's higher-margin existing products.

Not quite. AMD will get plenty of market share.

We were only talking about Intel's own sales alone.

AMD's market share gains will be Intel's market share losses.



but the desire to have famous western gear for bragging purposes are
very high.

It is a computer, not a fashion accessory. Even for notebooks that are
carried around, people see the name on the case, and not the name
on the cpu as some is in public using the notebook.

No, it is quite definitely a fashion accessory. The need for computers in
the third world are very low.

As for the name on the case, haven't you seen the "Intel Inside" and the
"Designed for Microsoft Windows XP" logos? They are noticeable.

They are on removable stickers near the keyboard on notebooks, not
etched in the outside case in huge letters in a bold color.

In fact,
these days in the third world, you can get away with not having a famous
brand-name box manufacturer, as long as you have at least the famous CPU or
OS manufacturers also prominently displayed. As long as a neighbour sees a
famous brand name of some sort somewhere, you're spared the shame.

Intel needs to sufficiently cripple the Celerons so they don't
cannibalize Pentium 4 sales too much.

Which a cacheless Pentium 4/Celeron would achieve. You get a famous
brandname and logo, so what if you barely know how to use the thing and
really have no need for one?

Yousuf Khan

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:55:22 GMT, "Yousuf Khan"
wrote:

third-world-busting Windows XP Starter Edition (XP lite); it's taking out a
lot of functionality with it, such as file and printer sharing, multiple
user logins, etc. Features that you or I would assume is just basic to any
computer system, being sacrificed completely for economy. I also think these

The first thing they should get rid of is the stupid pointless,
wasting my time animations... Multiple user login is fine, who really
uses Windows as a multiple login workstation anyway? :PpP

Branding is often very important in the third-world where incomes are low,
but the desire to have famous western gear for bragging purposes are very
high.

About 12~14 years ago, when my country was still in the developing
stage, when I was on a student's payscale which is likely to be as
close to third world pay as I can get, it was a no brainer when
offered the choice between an AMD or Intel 486 (or was it a 386? too
far away to remember) and the prices.

While I agree branding is important, but unless the price parity is
non-existent, for 3rd world income levels, the price should win most
of the time. People would rather be able to brag about quantity they
already are familiar with, i.e. "my cpu (Sempron) runs at 1.8Ghz and
has 80GB of ram! Yours only 1Ghz and 256MB! hahaha loser!"

Bragging about having an Intel vs a AMD might not work well,
especially if the Shelton develops the same reputation as the Celeron.
Till this day, I still meet plenty of people who will insist on
getting a Intel despite a tight budget BUT refuse adamantly to even
consider a Celeron.

--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
. cable.rogers.com...
JK wrote:
I don't need those features, and would gladly do without them to get
the next version of Windows at half price. Windows is too large
anyway, and
a scaled down version would be nice.

I'd say a good price for Windows would be $10, maybe $15 at the uppermost.
That's Canadian dollars I'm talking about too. Pretty much nothing more
than
the cost of the CD and its case. Since Microsoft doesn't provide tech
support anyways, therefore that's all Windows is worth.


Interesting to hear you think it is worth more than Linux.

--

... Hank

http://horedson.home.att.net
http://w0rli.home.att.net

Yousuf Khan wrote:

No argument there about the performance, but I assume that Intel really
doesn't care too much about performance since it's meant for "emerging"
markets, and that it's going to rely solely on brand-name here. It seems to
be remarkably similar to the approach Microsoft is taking with its
third-world-busting Windows XP Starter Edition (XP lite); it's taking out a
lot of functionality with it, such as file and printer sharing, multiple
user logins, etc. Features that you or I would assume is just basic to any
computer system, being sacrificed completely for economy. I also think these
sacrificed basic features will also result in no one in the developed world
wanting to touch these products, thus leaving the developed world markets
available only for Intel's higher-margin existing products.

At that point will people opt for price plus features and run Linux
instead? It now has some brand name recognition as the #2 desktop o/s in
the world.

--
bill davidsen )
SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
Project Leader, USENET news
http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com

JK wrote:
As for the name on the case, haven't you seen the "Intel Inside" and
the "Designed for Microsoft Windows XP" logos? They are noticeable.

They are on removable stickers near the keyboard on notebooks, not
etched in the outside case in huge letters in a bold color.

Makes very little difference, I've seen most of the original stickers remain
glued on for years in places like these. Many people keep their computers,
monitors and keyboards covered beneath cloth doilies for most of the time
they aren't used, and they only remove them while guests are around to view
them.

Yousuf Khan