A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Processors » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Intel cancels next-generation Xeon for even-more-next-generationXeon



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 25th 05, 01:01 AM
Yousuf Khan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Intel cancels next-generation Xeon for even-more-next-generationXeon

Tigerton, get used to that name. Apparently it's gonna have
Hypertransport in it. :-)

Intel Shifts Plans for Server Chips: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/051024/intel...hips.html?.v=2

PS- oh, and it's also delaying the Montecito Itanium, as EdG posted.

Yousuf Khan
  #2  
Old October 25th 05, 01:48 PM
George Macdonald
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Intel cancels next-generation Xeon for even-more-next-generation Xeon

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 21:06:39 -0500, EdG wrote:

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:01:21 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:

Tigerton, get used to that name. Apparently it's gonna have
Hypertransport in it. :-)

Intel Shifts Plans for Server Chips: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/051024/intel...hips.html?.v=2

PS- oh, and it's also delaying the Montecito Itanium, as EdG posted.

Yousuf Khan


Wasn't Intel talking about using a high-speed interconnect a long time
ago, maybe a year or two before Opteron? GIO or something? What happened
with that?


Well there was NGIO and then 3GIO, which became PCI Express.

IIRC 2007 is the scheduled intro of the common Intanium/x86 bus, which is
expected to be an integrated memory controller architecture a packetized
I/O bus -- CSI or sumthin'??.

And not long ago I read somewhere Intel was going to use a dual bus like
the one AMD used on the Athlon MP, I can only hope that was false or
they have now dumped that too, I doubt it would get them far, still a
shared bus right?


I believe the dual independent bus is scheduled for next year some time
with the new 65nm & P-M derived desktop/server chips... dunno if that's
what Bensley is supposed to be. All those damned code names drive me nuts.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
  #3  
Old October 25th 05, 08:00 PM
YKhan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Intel cancels next-generation Xeon for even-more-next-generation Xeon

EdG wrote:
Wasn't Intel talking about using a high-speed interconnect a long time
ago, maybe a year or two before Opteron? GIO or something? What happened
with that?


Yeah, that was 3GIO, which became Arapahoe, which became PCI-Express.
That was in a futile attempt to derail any momentum building for AMD's
Hypertransport. Of course PCI-E is no competition for HT, it's much too
bloated to be a chip-to-chip interconnect. AMD never fell for it, and
kept HT as simple as possible while Intel threw as much bling-bling
into PCI-e to dazzle people with features.

Now it looks like AMD might even use PCI-e against Intel, if the
rumours about AMD building a PCI-e link directly into its processors
can be believed.

And not long ago I read somewhere Intel was going to use a dual bus like
the one AMD used on the Athlon MP, I can only hope that was false or
they have now dumped that too, I doubt it would get them far, still a
shared bus right?


Yeah, I think that was supposed to be in the Deerfield processor that
Intel just cancelled.

Yousuf Khan

  #4  
Old October 25th 05, 10:37 PM
daytripper
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Intel cancels next-generation Xeon for even-more-next-generation Xeon

On 25 Oct 2005 12:00:45 -0700, "YKhan" wrote:

EdG wrote:
Wasn't Intel talking about using a high-speed interconnect a long time
ago, maybe a year or two before Opteron? GIO or something? What happened
with that?


Yeah, that was 3GIO, which became Arapahoe, which became PCI-Express.
That was in a futile attempt to derail any momentum building for AMD's
Hypertransport. Of course PCI-E is no competition for HT, it's much too
bloated to be a chip-to-chip interconnect. AMD never fell for it, and
kept HT as simple as possible while Intel threw as much bling-bling
into PCI-e to dazzle people with features.

Now it looks like AMD might even use PCI-e against Intel, if the
rumours about AMD building a PCI-e link directly into its processors
can be believed.

And not long ago I read somewhere Intel was going to use a dual bus like
the one AMD used on the Athlon MP, I can only hope that was false or
they have now dumped that too, I doubt it would get them far, still a
shared bus right?


Yeah, I think that was supposed to be in the Deerfield processor that
Intel just cancelled.

Yousuf Khan


The whole fleet of next years Xeons (now heating up verification labs at
select OEMs) use a separate hose for each processor to MCH connection. They're
not going to get to 1333mhz fsb speeds with daisy-chains...
  #5  
Old October 26th 05, 03:09 AM
keith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Intel cancels next-generation Xeon for even-more-next-generation Xeon

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 17:37:08 -0400, daytripper wrote:

On 25 Oct 2005 12:00:45 -0700, "YKhan" wrote:

EdG wrote:
Wasn't Intel talking about using a high-speed interconnect a long time
ago, maybe a year or two before Opteron? GIO or something? What happened
with that?


Yeah, that was 3GIO, which became Arapahoe, which became PCI-Express.
That was in a futile attempt to derail any momentum building for AMD's
Hypertransport. Of course PCI-E is no competition for HT, it's much too
bloated to be a chip-to-chip interconnect. AMD never fell for it, and
kept HT as simple as possible while Intel threw as much bling-bling
into PCI-e to dazzle people with features.

Now it looks like AMD might even use PCI-e against Intel, if the
rumours about AMD building a PCI-e link directly into its processors
can be believed.

And not long ago I read somewhere Intel was going to use a dual bus like
the one AMD used on the Athlon MP, I can only hope that was false or
they have now dumped that too, I doubt it would get them far, still a
shared bus right?


Yeah, I think that was supposed to be in the Deerfield processor that
Intel just cancelled.

Yousuf Khan


The whole fleet of next years Xeons (now heating up verification labs at
select OEMs) use a separate hose for each processor to MCH connection. They're
not going to get to 1333mhz fsb speeds with daisy-chains...


Ok, but am I the only one who detects Intel trying to defend the
indefensable? IBM tried to hold the "upper ground" too, oh, about 15
years ago. ...and had a better position (different ISA).

--
Keith
  #6  
Old October 28th 05, 01:54 AM
Yousuf Khan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default IBM defends the indefensible

keith wrote:
Ok, but am I the only one who detects Intel trying to defend the
indefensable? IBM tried to hold the "upper ground" too, oh, about 15
years ago. ...and had a better position (different ISA).


Hey, speaking of IBM defending the indefensible. They just picked up
Solaris as one of their OS choices on their blade servers.

Sun freezes hell, gets IBM to sell Solaris on blades | The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10..._solarisblade/

Yousuf Khan
  #7  
Old October 28th 05, 02:55 AM
keith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default IBM defends the indefensible

On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 20:54:34 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:

keith wrote:
Ok, but am I the only one who detects Intel trying to defend the
indefensable? IBM tried to hold the "upper ground" too, oh, about 15
years ago. ...and had a better position (different ISA).


Hey, speaking of IBM defending the indefensible. They just picked up
Solaris as one of their OS choices on their blade servers.

Sun freezes hell, gets IBM to sell Solaris on blades | The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10..._solarisblade/


No $#|+! Global warming? Hell *has* frozen! ;-)

--
Keith

  #8  
Old October 28th 05, 03:05 AM
Del Cecchi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default IBM defends the indefensible


"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
news
keith wrote:
Ok, but am I the only one who detects Intel trying to defend the
indefensable? IBM tried to hold the "upper ground" too, oh, about 15
years ago. ...and had a better position (different ISA).


Hey, speaking of IBM defending the indefensible. They just picked up
Solaris as one of their OS choices on their blade servers.

Sun freezes hell, gets IBM to sell Solaris on blades | The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10..._solarisblade/

Yousuf Khan

You must have missed this back in june....

http://news.com.com/IBM+backs+Suns+S...3-5764485.html

remember the new ibm motto, "anything for a buck" :-)

del


  #9  
Old October 28th 05, 04:59 AM
David Kanter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Intel cancels next-generation Xeon for even-more-next-generation Xeon

Yeah, that was 3GIO, which became Arapahoe, which became PCI-Express.
That was in a futile attempt to derail any momentum building for AMD's
Hypertransport. Of course PCI-E is no competition for HT, it's much too
bloated to be a chip-to-chip interconnect. AMD never fell for it, and
kept HT as simple as possible while Intel threw as much bling-bling
into PCI-e to dazzle people with features.


How is it bloated, oh font of interconnect wisdom? Perhaps you don't
realize it, but serial interconnects are far higher bandwidth...

Now it looks like AMD might even use PCI-e against Intel, if the
rumours about AMD building a PCI-e link directly into its processors
can be believed.


I don't see how that is "using PCI-e against Intel"...

And not long ago I read somewhere Intel was going to use a dual bus like
the one AMD used on the Athlon MP, I can only hope that was false or
they have now dumped that too, I doubt it would get them far, still a
shared bus right?


Yeah, I think that was supposed to be in the Deerfield processor that
Intel just cancelled.


No it's not cancelled moron. Deerfield is a LV IPF part. They
cancelled Whitefield. White, not deer.

Intel's next gen server chipset is a wonderful piece of work and
features dual independent FSBs. I suspect the next generation after
that will feature 4 or more.

David

  #10  
Old October 28th 05, 01:18 PM
Alan Walpool
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default IBM defends the indefensible

"Del" == Del Cecchi writes:

Del "Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
Del news
keith wrote:
Ok, but am I the only one who detects Intel trying to defend the
indefensable? IBM tried to hold the "upper ground" too, oh, about
15 years ago. ...and had a better position (different ISA).

Hey, speaking of IBM defending the indefensible. They just picked
up Solaris as one of their OS choices on their blade servers.

Sun freezes hell, gets IBM to sell Solaris on blades | The
Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10..._solarisblade/

Yousuf Khan


Del You must have missed this back in june....

Del http://news.com.com/IBM+backs+Suns+S...3-5764485.html

Del remember the new ibm motto, "anything for a buck" :-)

Del del


Actually no surprise here. This is the direction IBM has been moving
for some time and that is OS neutral. IBM has been changing to a
service company and has stated that clearly. The only hardware
division IBM wants to keep is the mainframe division because there is
very little competition and it is still a cash cow.

Heck if they can sale windows they can sale anything ;-)). Well
depends on the contract with M$, but I think after the last anti-trust
lawsuit that M$ won't have a contract like that soon.

Whatever.

Alan

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Intel found to be abusing market power in Japan chrisv General 152 March 26th 05 07:57 AM
Need help with reading lspci -tv and lspci -vv are we running at 33 or 66 mhz ??? (Intel SE7320SP2 board) news.tele.dk Intel 1 December 16th 04 09:00 PM
Intel Build - Next Generation vs Last Generation MikeW Homebuilt PC's 15 August 22nd 04 05:51 AM
AMD or Intel J.Clarke Storage (alternative) 56 December 11th 03 04:05 AM
<> XEON PROCESSORS AND MEMORY Alexander Gorban Acer Computers 0 October 24th 03 07:03 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.