Intel On the Offensive: Roadmap Details and Analysis
by Kristopher Kubicki & Jarred Walton on June 14, 2005 4:33 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Also mentioned in the roadmap were speed and feature revisions on the Celeron lineup. Aside from the extra speed boost, the new Celeron chips will also receive EM64T support.
The Celeron D 351/350 will launch this month at $127 with price cuts on all Celeron and Pentium chips almost exactly a month after. Unfortunately, our crystal ball doesn't go past Celeron 3.33GHz. We would expect to see a Cedar Mill revision of Celeron, perhaps with 512KB L2 cache. The roadmaps very specifically do not show any new value processors based on 65nm at least through Q2'06. The roadmap does hint at speed bumps in Q2'06, but the exact reason why there are no 65nm value processors seems quite vague.
Just before Broadwater, we will see the launch of 945GZ. G45GZ seems almost like a step back, with identical features to 915G including 800FSB and DDR2-533. However, the chipset will get an update on the integrated graphics to GMA950 and an updated Southbridge to ICH7. Oddly enough, Intel also claims that this will be a mainstream chipset, even though the FSB and DDR clocks are lower than existing 945P products. If anything, this might be just another indicator that Intel's push for 1066FSB wasn't really the solution that they had intended.
Intel has also decided to rework their motherboard SKUs and this should be evident already on the retail market. Each new Intel branded motherboard based on 945 or higher will receive one of several tags listed below:
Intel Single Core Value Desktop Lineup LGA775 |
||||
Processor |
Speed |
L2 Cache |
FSB |
Launch |
Celeron D 355 |
3.33GHz |
256KB |
533MHz |
Q4'05 |
Celeron D 351 |
3.20GHz |
256KB |
533MHz |
Soon |
Celeron D 346 |
3.06GHz |
256KB |
533MHz |
Soon |
Celeron D 341 |
2.93GHz |
256KB |
533MHz |
Soon |
Celeron D 336 |
2.80GHz |
256KB |
533MHz |
Soon |
Celeron D 331 |
2.66GHz |
256KB |
533MHz |
Soon |
Celeron D 326 |
2.53GHz |
256KB |
533MHz |
Soon |
The Celeron D 351/350 will launch this month at $127 with price cuts on all Celeron and Pentium chips almost exactly a month after. Unfortunately, our crystal ball doesn't go past Celeron 3.33GHz. We would expect to see a Cedar Mill revision of Celeron, perhaps with 512KB L2 cache. The roadmaps very specifically do not show any new value processors based on 65nm at least through Q2'06. The roadmap does hint at speed bumps in Q2'06, but the exact reason why there are no 65nm value processors seems quite vague.
Desktop Chipsets
The roadmap also starts to talk about Intel's Broadwater chipset. Broadwater sounds exciting because it replaces all chipsets for Intel - from 955X all the way down. Our guess is that Broadwater will act more like nForce; different revisions will fill differing demands. Where Intel always used to speak of two differing chipsets (like Canterwood/Springdale, Alderwood/Grantsdale, Glenwood/Lakeport), even if they were nearly identical, the fact that Intel talks about a single chipset family unifying all of their desktop platforms indicates that things won't be exactly business as usual come Q2'06 during the next chipset launch. Aside from the general updates (ICH8 and next generation iAMT), the roadmaps revealed almost nothing about Broadwater.Just before Broadwater, we will see the launch of 945GZ. G45GZ seems almost like a step back, with identical features to 915G including 800FSB and DDR2-533. However, the chipset will get an update on the integrated graphics to GMA950 and an updated Southbridge to ICH7. Oddly enough, Intel also claims that this will be a mainstream chipset, even though the FSB and DDR clocks are lower than existing 945P products. If anything, this might be just another indicator that Intel's push for 1066FSB wasn't really the solution that they had intended.
Intel has also decided to rework their motherboard SKUs and this should be evident already on the retail market. Each new Intel branded motherboard based on 945 or higher will receive one of several tags listed below:
- X - Extreme Series
- M - Media Series
- E - Executive Series
- C - Classic Series
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
View All Comments
porkster - Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - link
I'll be upgrading to the P4-633 then. Yeah it's strange thye are even going to both with the 6x2 series unless they want to make a tier of products, but that sucks..
Furen - Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - link
Well put.DRM, at least in the beginning, will be an enabling technology. The problem is not the technology itself but rather the ability to ENFORCE license agreements it gives content providers.
I personally dont think everyone following license agreements is the problem, but rather the fact that the content providers will be able to achieve THEIR aims using MY hardware. This will, in turn, make it easier for content providers to force users into insane license agreements, like being able to play a song only on a single pc, for example (at least, that's what my limited understanding of DRM--and trusted computing as a whole--leads me to believe).
JarredWalton - Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - link
One thing we probably should have pointed out is that this roadmap ends right before the time when we should start seeing the Conroe/Merom CPU cores show up (2H'06). Part of that is probably because not even Intel known what they'll call those processors, but I think that's the biggest event currently on the Intel CPU horizon. :)KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - link
PrinceGaz: Two things; "just about every tech site" was really ONE website that understood something poorly, reported on it, and then about 30 other websites reporting the same thing or reclarifying the original statement. DTCP is surprisingly similar to HDCP in many ways but mainly differs in the fact that it only works for DTCP-ready content. How much DTCP content are you viewing right now that you need to worry about whether or not it will hamper your multimedia experience? I'm kinda approaching this like a scenario for Macrovision without DVDs.OK point 2; it can be disabled. The first reaction many people claim is "oh it can be disabled, it's only a matter of time before you cannot!". Maybe. On the other hand, if you want IPTV without any DRM you might want to start your own broadcast studio.
I don't like unnecissary DRM as much as the next person, but I do want to watch four different angles of the Yankees @ 1080p over FIOS. Maybe I'll write something exploring some of the non-knee jerk details of DTCP.
Kristopher
tfranzese - Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - link
A 2.5 GHz Yonah with all the trimmings and some of the poor performing areas addressed might impress me.None of this stuff in their roadmap does however.
PrinceGaz - Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - link
VT is interesting and has major advantages over using something like VMWare which only implements partial hardware support for a host OS. Of course the vast majority of people, even most AT readers, are unlikely to use it seriously.Personally I'm far more interested/concerned about the progress of Intel's LaGrande and AMD's Presidio security (aka hardware DRM) in forthcoming chips. Why is it that this topic seems to be completely ignored by AT articles when it is potentially the most important aspect of new processors, given the implications it has on who will really control our computer (assuming you are foolish enough to install the DRM-riddled Longhorn when it is released)?
Just about every other tech site has reported about the recent Pentium D DRM story in depth (both the initial story, and the follow up with their analysis of what that really meant), but it hasn't had a single mention on AT.
AlexWade - Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - link
And to think, if it wasn't for AMD's competition, we would still be using Pentium 1 at 100 MHz.HSuke - Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - link
I agree. 2.5+ GHz Yonahs with SSE3 would be nice.Doormat - Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - link
Yea I'm really disappointed in Yonah performance. I fully expected to see 2.5GHz Yonahs by Q1 2006.KayKay - Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - link
I like the Intel Chipset/Processor names, thats about it, as it is doubtful I will buy a desktop Intel CPU ever again