Intel On the Offensive: Roadmap Details and Analysis
by Kristopher Kubicki & Jarred Walton on June 14, 2005 4:33 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
The Server Side of Things
With the exception of Yonah showing up where Xeon should be, there is very little new for servers.Dual core is inevitably moving toward servers, and the chip that will spearhead that launch is Dempsey. Dempsey is similar to Smithfield, but at the same time, it offers HyperThreading support, 1066FSB, Demand Based Switching and Vanderpool Technology. Expect Dempsey to show up around Q1'06. The enterprise version of Dempsey, dubbed Paxville, will act as the enterprise large cache version of Dempsey, but at a slower 800MHz front side bus. Expect Paxville at about the same time as Dempsey. Intel makes specific note on the roadmap that the processor brand name for Paxville and Dempsey is TBD - maybe Xeon has had its end?
Intel Single Core Volume Server Lineup LGA775 |
|||
Chipset |
FSB Clock |
Cache Size |
Launch |
Xeon 3.6GHz |
667MHz |
2MB L2 |
Q4'05 |
Xeon 3.4GHz |
667MHz |
2MB L2 |
Soon |
Xeon 3.2GHz |
667MHz |
2MB L2 |
Soon |
Xeon 3.0GHz |
667MHz |
2MB L2 |
Soon |
Xeon 2.8GHz |
667MHz |
2MB L2 |
Q3'05 |
Until dual core shows up on servers, we have to settle for Iriwindale (Prescott 2M) server chipsets. Since Nocona 3.8GHz and 4.0GHz were canceled, there hasn't been much news on the server lineup. All new 3.4GHz and faster Irwindale chipsets will receive support for DBS (Demand Based Switching), but otherwise remain identical in core to their slower alternatives. Potomac and Cranford have all of their SKUs announced until Paxville comes along next year.
Dempsey and Paxville will need a new platform to run on. As in chipsets past, there are two next generation chipisets for server motherboards: Greencreek (the successor to E7535), and Blackford (the successor to E7520 and E7320). Blackford and Blackford VS are the base chipsets supporting dual core server processors. Blackford will support 4 FBD channels, 3 PCIe x8 segments and a total of 64GB of memory. Vanderpool Technology is supported on the motherboard as well as iAMT. Greencreek differs slightly by using two of its PCIe x8 segments for an x16 PCIe graphics slot and a snoop filter. Both chips also support 64bit PCI-X and PCI.
Closing Thoughts
There are clearly some interesting things moving forward inside Intel. The Sossaman project is probably one of our more favorite tidbits - four core Yonah blades would certainly pique our attention. The slightly lower clockspeed has us concerned about whether or not Yonah will really be able to compete with similar offerings from AMD and even Pentium D processors at the same time, but the incredibly low power requirements are enough to impress anyone.The unified Broadwater family scheduled to replace 945P and 955X a year from now also has our attention. There was some speculation several months ago about Intel unifying their Xeon and Itanium socket design within the next year or so. While the roadmaps certainly don't indicate anything like that, unifying the desktop chipset families first might be a step toward that sort of unification.
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