Rumor: Intel to Delay Ivy Bridge

18

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

JohnP

So looking back at the past 4 months since this article came out, it looks like both of the rumors were true that AMD's Bulldozer was not much of a threat and that Intel was using the interim to sell more Sandy Bridge and SB-E chips. As for saving a few bucks or bad yields, I have not heard much in that as Intel came out with a very profitable quarter and that 22nm yields are doing fine (at least for Intel).

avatar

bautrey

Hahahahahaha!  March 2012!!!  Eat it Intel fans.  I'm going to be basking in my Bulldozer in a couple more weeks.   :D

avatar

JohnP

He who laughs last... Bulldozer made the hall of shame awards this year as a bust.

avatar

I Jedi

LLOL! Eat it AMD fanboys, Ivy Bridge is going to run Bulldozer down in six months.

avatar

thetechchild

Hopefully the opposite is true. For one, I think it unlikely that Intel grabbed AMD secrets somehow. I'm thinking that Intel is unsure of Bulldozer's standing as a relatively renovated architecture, and thus Intel is preparing to lower its price:performance ratio (probably by developing further rather than dropping prices) to combat it.

avatar

rtangwai

I was under the impression from several news sources that the original delay to March 2012 for release was because retailers took a pounding because of the SATA controller error that caused all those motherboards to be replaced and Intel wanted to give retailers a bigger sales window to compensate.  Does the switch in factories mean *ANOTHER* delay to June 2012 release (March 2012 for samples) or is it concurrent, that if Intel planned on delaying Ivy Bridge to March 2012 anyway for sales channels reasons take advantage of it and save some money along the way?

I have been holding off on upgrading my Q9550 because I want the 133MHz BCLK on Ivy Bridge, but this is starting to get ridiculous - the target date has slipped 6 months and that's assuming nothing goes wrong.  If 22nm has bad yields, it could delay Ivy Bridge an entire "tock" generation, which may not be the best thing to do if AMD's Bulldozer turns out to be a healthy competitor to Sandy Bridge.

avatar

vrmlbasic

Can't we be more optimistic here and hope that Intel is delaying Ivy Bridge for reasoning opposite to that given in the article, that Bulldozer's performance annihilates the current Intel chips & that Ivy Bridge as it stood to be released in 2011 couldn't hold a candle to it?

I'd like to believe, I don't want to have to go back to an Intel based machine if I don't have to. The Atom processor is a disgrace, and it has biased me against Intel, perhaps irrationally, though is it irrational to be disgusted with a processor in a "netbook" which can be hamstrung by Flash, which is (unfortunately) the lynchpin of the modern Internet? AMD was so good, once upon a time. 

A man can dream, right?  :D

avatar

livebriand

Netbooks: AMD rules (the E350)

Mid-range to high-end regular machines: Intel (amd is sooo behind)

Low-end regular machines: A bit hard to say. AMD can be a better value, but their cpus suck at games. However, the new A series have low-end dedicated-class graphics that beat Intel GMA. The i3 is still better performance-wise though.

Gaming machine: Intel by far.

Personally, I own a AMD E350 netbook and a i5 desktop. The netbook is fine for its' purpose, and the desktop, ditto. (it's a first gen i5 btw) Given what I've heard, when I replace an older XP desktop in the house (Pentium 4), it'll be with an i3 machine. I don't like what I've seen lately from AMD.

avatar

DU00

What does an Atom netbook have to do woth processors that cost twice as much as said netbook? Just curious...

avatar

thetechchild

It speaks for your processor building capabilities, and your company policies in pricing-to-performance ratios. Some things are the same no matter what product you decide to buy from a company.

avatar

DU00

While I agree that Atom is terrible, I don't think that Intel's capabilities should be measured by one dud, so to speak. I agree that their enthusiast offerings are pricy but you don't have to reach for the top shelf to get really good performance. For Example take the i5 2500k. It's relatively "cheap" and gives some of the bigger chips a run for their money (x58).

avatar

I Jedi

"Ivy Bridge is being pushed back to March 2012"

This is the release schedule that I have been hearing for the past few weeks, so this still comes as no surprise to me. Don't scare me like that, Paul.

avatar

praack

rumor as to why

could be as simple as fab issues, they are changing from a 24 to a 22 yet no thought it could be because of that? AMD is able to recoup a lot of chips due to the bin process they use, Intel does not have that luxury- so if the initial testing is not returning a very high rate from the wafer then yes they will delay.

avatar

Happy

Not to be a jerk but I believe I read about Intel delaying Ivy Bridge till the first half of 2012 a few weeks ago. So while the info is old I believe the reason you gave is different than the one I read about. I had read a few weeks ago that the probable reason Intel was delaying Ivy Bridge was because they wanted to give time for their Enthusiast Sandy Bridge chips to sell and didn't want to undercut their Sandy Bridge E numbers by causing people to bypass it in favor of just waiting until Ivy Bridge came out. By putting this time buffer between the releases of Sandy Bridge E processors and Ivy Bridge processors, it will ensure that Intel doesn't compete against itself.

avatar

I Jedi

The better question is - who wouldn't wait? The new Ivy Bridge processor will officially support PCIe 3.0, USB 3.0, SATA 3.0, as well as integrate Thunderbolt into later models. On top of this, Intel is predicting that Ivy Bridge will have a 20% performance increase in CPU power, as well as a 30% increase in graphics capability thanks to "tweaks" and upgrades to the current Sandy Bridge architecture. Not to mention the fact that Ivy Bridge processors will be the first to utilize trigate transistors. 

The only thing Sandy Bridge-e has going for it is that it's aimed at the enthusiast, who want PCIe 3.0 and SATA 3.0 along with official support for USB 3.0, quad memory setup, and has some processors coming out with high caches and tons of cores, such as the 3930K. The 3930K will sport a six core processor, a 12 MB L3 cache, and will probably be the consumer choice; however, I distress that Ivy Bridge still has the lead with a better Sandy Bridge architecture and trigate transistors.

avatar

DU00

Some of the roadmaps I've seen would suggest that Ivy Bridge is supposed to be the replacement for the current SB chips (mainstream) while Sandy Bridge-E will be for enthusiasts. Are Sandy Bridge-E the socket 2011 or are the new Ivy Bridge going to that socket? I've read mixed reports so....

avatar

I Jedi

The Sandy Bridge-e will use the 2011 socket while the Ivy Bridge processors will use the 1155. The Ivy Bridge processors WILL be backwards compatible with regular Sandy Bridge motherboards that also use the 1155 socket. My recommendation, if you are going with Ivy Bridge, is to buy a motherboard equipped to take full advantage of everything the processor has to offer, along with the chipset features, such as the Q77.

avatar

DU00

Thanks for the clarification. I've read a lot of different reports from different people saying different things. Some said that Ivy Bridge would be the successor to x58 so I was just a little cross. So now I know that Sandy Bridge-E will be that replacement. I'm not planning an upgrade for at least two years since my current x58 build will probably be able to handle just about anything I can throw at it for a good while (Inventor Pro, Photoshop, and some Premiere Pro). Besides I'm a student I can't afford it anyways.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.