| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JAC
Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 3469
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:55 am Post subject: What is Intel's most profitable CPU? |
 |
|
| Is it the 486? I came across some old posts on usenet that seemed to indicate Intel made big $$ on the 486. They were able to use chips from poor yields - just run them slower or disconnect the fpu - (which they later designed out?). The 486 also carried well into the embedded market. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jd
Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 1562
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:03 pm Post subject: Re: What is Intel's most profitable CPU? |
|
|
| JAC wrote: | | Is it the 486? I came across some old posts on usenet that seemed to indicate Intel made big $$ on the 486. They were able to use chips from poor yields - just run them slower or disconnect the fpu - (which they later designed out?). The 486 also carried well into the embedded market. |
There ! You see, I tryed to tell everyone that Intel did cheat the public back then,and they didn't believe me 
JD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipcollector
Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 1681
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:21 pm Post subject: Re: What is Intel's most profitable CPU? |
|
|
I think intel's most profitable CPU is either the Pentium D 9** series (already out) or another core to be released later this year. ;D
_________________
http://www.RareCPUs.com
OR
Vintage Chip Database, www.RareCPUs.com/database
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jd
Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 1562
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
.......  ....don't mind me cutting in with this news !
"We have a new microarchitecture under development and the first substantiation of that will be the quad-core to be launched in mid 2007," said Dirk Meyer, AMD's president and chief operating officer.
At an analyst day last month, AMD talked about its plans for the new architecture, which includes L3 cache, 32-bit instruction fetch, dual 128-bit SSE data flow, and dual 128-bit loads per cycle.
AMD has stressed that its quad-core design will be a "true quad-core," meaning it will contain four separate cores on a die.
what else can I say.....Intel pffffffft !  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chipcollector
Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 1681
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GlinGlin wrote: | ....... ....don't mind me cutting in with this news !
"We have a new microarchitecture under development and the first substantiation of that will be the quad-core to be launched in mid 2007," said Dirk Meyer, AMD's president and chief operating officer.
At an analyst day last month, AMD talked about its plans for the new architecture, which includes L3 cache, 32-bit instruction fetch, dual 128-bit SSE data flow, and dual 128-bit loads per cycle.
AMD has stressed that its quad-core design will be a "true quad-core," meaning it will contain four separate cores on a die.
what else can I say.....Intel pffffffft ! |
Too bad Intel got there first.
http://www.intel.com/technology/architecture/coremicro/
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6038148.html
"Intel will also deliver a quad-core (4 full execution cores) processor to the DP Server segment based upon this new microarchitecture, codenamed Clovertown. Clovertown is targeted for introduction in the first quarter of 2007, on the Bensley and Glidewell platforms."
"Rattner says the Clovertown architecture is scalable to 32 or more cores on a single chip"
pfffttt amd 
_________________
http://www.RareCPUs.com
OR
Vintage Chip Database, www.RareCPUs.com/database
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JAC
Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 3469
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| heh.. ok.. should I ask.. What is Intel's most profitable cpu released before 2000? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CPUShack
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 34259
Location: State of Jefferson, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You may be surprised to see that their most profitable could be a microcontroller.
Life span is much longer, and dev costs are smaller. ASP is lower but sales are an order of magnitude higher.
_________________
New for 2025! The CPU Shack has a co-processor!
Visit The CPU Shack of microprocessor history and information. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JAC
Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 3469
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CPUShack wrote: | You may be surprised to see that their most profitable could be a microcontroller.
Life span is much longer, and dev costs are smaller. ASP is lower but sales are an order of magnitude higher. |
yeah.. I figured that, but I was curious about their x86 cpus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CPUShack
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 34259
Location: State of Jefferson, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CPUShack
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 34259
Location: State of Jefferson, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chip68
Joined: 19 Oct 2004
Posts: 1024
Location: Central Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
How about the other end of the spectrum... Opinions as to their biggest commercial flop? (Besides the 4004. )
- CMW |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CPUShack
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 34259
Location: State of Jefferson, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CPUShack
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 34259
Location: State of Jefferson, USA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FDIV
Joined: 12 Mar 2006
Posts: 740
Location: Ohio, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 12:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
I consider the Itanium their biggest flop. It cost a fortune to design, took forever to get from development to production, and when it got their it sucked. Not only did intel hemorage money on it but they also lost a great deal of "political capital" by draging in a bunch of other companies into thier failed archetecture along the way. All hail the Itanic. It may not have been fast, it may not have had much code written to run on it, and its hardware emulation was slower then software, but it was expensive very expensive for everyone involved  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JAC
Joined: 24 Jul 2005
Posts: 3469
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| This reminds me of something I think IBM did in the early days.. I remember this been mentioned in a software engineering class at university many years ago. Did they have a software project in development and no matter how many more programmers they threw at it, they still couldnt meet the deadline? Does anyone know more about this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
