Coppermine is Out-What about AGP 4x?

[Ozymandis]

Coppermine is at GamePC.com, unless they are joking. What I wonder is will it have AGP4x motherboards available soon? And will our Maxes take advantage of the bandwidth? Thoughts, anyone?

[Scytale]

Don't hold your breath. Intel just discovered a serious problem with i820/Camino, and the chipset will be delayed (for months probably).

Read about it <A HREF=http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-123024.html?tag=st.ne.1002.tgif?st.ne.fd.gif.d>her e</A> and <A HREF=http://www.theregister.co.uk/990924-000011.html>here</A>


[This message has been edited by Scytale (edited 09-24-1999).]

[LrngToFly]

Get yer codenames straight!

Coppermine is the next gen (based on a newer process) P3, not the AGP 4x supporting chipset (Camino- or officially the "820").

It would sure be nice to see Intel re-intro the 820 w/ PC133 SDRAM support. I'm not holding my breath though. When Intel has an agenda, (which is their $1B investment/kickback scheme in Rambus) they'll do anything to push it through.

Amazing how much Intel is ****ing up the intro of 820. I'm sure some Intel shmuck will lose their job over this. Unfortunately it'll be some tech dude instead of whatever exec pushed the Rambus idea in the first place.

Hopefully Via will come through w/ an AGP 4x, UDMA-66 chipset _with_ PC133 SDRAM support for us.

I'm a previous <a href="http://www.faceintel.com/">Intel employee</a>... Still living on the nice fat severence I got when laid off!


[This message has been edited by LrngToFly (edited 09-24-1999).]

[Mark F]

Then you know Intel can fall back to PC100 memory without a problem, as they helped define the standard. But will never accept PC133 memory because they didn't have a hand in it, exept by an act of...a higher being.
But, maybe with the right spin...they could by saying PC133 is an extension of PC100. As most PC133 was produced to be consistent with the PC100 standerd.
Oh well Intel are really the 'Knights who say NIH' -Not Invented Here (and as they have handled the whole 820 deal), in mentality. Yes somebody's head should roll, to make sure this doesn't happen again. And we wouldn't have to go through this kind of crap again (any tine soon).

Mark F.

------------------
OH NO, my retractable cup holder swallowed a CD



[This message has been edited by Mark F (edited 09-25-1999).]

[LrngToFly]

The reason Intel doesn't support PC133 SDRAM is that they purchased $1 Billion of Rambus stock. It has nothing to do w/ a NIH mentality.

PC133 is pretty much just PC100 overclocked- technically not difficult. The BIG reason Intel is in the wrong is that PC133 SDRAM outperforms 600 MHz Rambus DRAM. (They're having mucho trouble w/ 800 MHz Rambus (which does compare well w/ 133 MHz SDRAM) and we probably won't see affordable 800 MHz parts for a long long time.) Intel is doing everything they can to squash 133 MHz SDRAM and other Rambus alternatives like DDR and QDR (double data rate, quad data rate) SDRAM. They're trying to protect that $1B and make it blossom to many $Bs. The FTC should not have allowed this investment. Major conflict of interest.

Since Intel keeps a tight hold on their P6 bus/chipset technologies, they had better watch their back when it comes to antitrust matters. I hope Via wins the <a href="http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19990628S0002">lawsuit</a>

In my opinion, Intel holds a decent enough portion of the x86 market to be deemed a monopoly- and they should not be allowed to expand that monopoly CPU marketshare to chipsets.* They should be forced to license the P6 bus to all chipset makers w/o restrictions. Via was reportedly restricted from integrating PC133 SDRAM support in their P6 chipset when they licensed the P6 tech from Intel. Intel built their chipset monopoly off their CPU monopoly the same way Microsoft built it's Office suite monopoly off the back of it's Windows monopoly. If you look at Microsoft's financials, you'll notice Office now brings in more profits to that company than Windows.

In my mind, both maneuvers were illegal.

Oh well, enough political crap.


*They built the chipset monopoly at a time when they didn't license the P6 bus to _anyone_ and when they had a 90%+ percent of the CPU market- before AMD did decently w/ the K6. Yes, AMD now owns a more heathly portion of the market, but the stuff Intel pulled in in the 1997 timeframe should have warranted an antitrust lawsuit. Now that they built their monopoly, they can sit back and reap the rewards. All while us consumers don't get the best and/or cheapest technology that can be had.


[This message has been edited by LrngToFly (edited 09-27-1999).]