Broadwell Delayed Again?

Looks like Broadwell has been delayed until early 2016 now. Does this mean Skylake will be delayed as well? Or will Skylake launch first? I'm confused

Intel's Extreme Broadwell-E chips reportedly not coming until early 2016 - PC Gamer

 

That is Broadwell- E, the extreme always come later than the normal ones

 

This does make me wonder if they're planning to completely skip Skylake-E/EP so that Cannonlake-E can catch up with Cannonlake, though...

 

ok guess I'll be rocking my 4930K setup for a few more years then

 

So mobile product line still on schedule for 2015?

 

Yeah, it's still on schedule. Y & U (ULV, etc.) Skylake are expected Q4 2015. The high-performance variants are expected in early 2016.

EDIT: By schedule, I mean delayed schedule. If Broadwell were on its actual schedule, it would have already been launched.

 

Yeah this isn't surprising, Haswell-E came out at the very end of August 2014.

 

Intel's in no rush. Why should they be. Stifling technology is all they're doing.

 

Intel is stifling technology? lol...

Intel could take the next half decade off and still be a leader (assuming they deliver everything they have on their table right now).

What they are doing is making sure a stupid gov't or other idiotic overseer doesn't break them up into a billion useless divisions that wouldn't be able to do what Intel is doing now: giving us amazing TOTAL performance (power, performance and price) that no one else can match or ever did in such a consistent and reproducible manner.

If meddling 'stupid'powers didn't have power over the so called 'free market' and Intel was allowed to chase the consumer and business customers as I'm sure they want to... sure, we'd be using much better platforms, I agree. But Intel would also be reaping the rewards of their hard work too - instead of having to share or being purposely crippled in the name of 'equality'.

 

Repeat after me: mo-no-po-ly

I blame AMD for throwing in the towel after the Bulldozer trainwreck, even though I doubt there's anything they could've done differently following such a huge disaster.

 

I think your analysis is far off base. As long as Intel doesn't break the law, they have nothing to fear from the government. Every last bit of government interest in Intel was always do to illegal anti-competitive practices. Having a good product is not against the law. Considering that Intel has always done everything it possibly could both under and above the law to stifle the competition, I fail to see how their current practices are now done to throw AMD a bone.

And it just so happens that the delayed and staggered releases, generation skipping for certain markets, obfuscation of their product lines, and continuously increasing market segmentation makes Intel A LOT MORE MONEY. It shafts consumers, but since Intel doesn't have much competition to worry about, they can do pretty much whatever they want. I really can't believe that you are such an Intel fanboy that you blame the government for all of Intel's actions that give themselves the most benefit at the expense of consumers. I guess to you it would be unthinkable that Intel isn't trying to give you the best technology it can and instead is just trying to reduce costs and get you to fork over as much money as they can make you.

 

I don't think AMD is throwing in the towel. They're obviously outclassed by an order of magnitude in R&D money, which is a significant disadvantage. But I saw an article a few weeks ago that they are working on a post-Bulldozer-family high-end CPU currently, due to come out a year or two after Excavator (so probably 2016 - 2017). Bulldozer itself was obviously a big disappointment, and Piledriver/Steamroller haven't been gigantic improvements (though the APU improvements have been nice). But, while it would be unrealistic to expect it to throw Cannonlake under the cannon, it does look like AMD is working towards at least one more try at a high-end CPU.

Disclaimer: I am taking a somewhat optimistic outlook, because the alternative is only Intel for high-end x86 in the future, and that's a future that I don't think would be good for the industry as a whole.

Nonetheless, it's a good thing there isn't yet another Broadwell delay. Even if Intel's improvements have been underwhelming CPU-wise since at least Sandy Bridge (and arguably since Nehalem), better some improvement than none at all.

 

Laws don't need to be broken for gov'ts to get involved... And I never suggested that Intel is throwing AMD a bone either.

If any company was allowed to successfully and legally claw their way to the top without gov't contention, there would only be monopolies left. That is the goal after all; it is not a goal of 'playing nice' in any event and all companies have been guilty of this since the beginning of time.

I am saying that while we may have more advanced electronics and platforms if Intel was actually threatened by AMD or anyone else in that area ever again, they can't afford to become the true monopoly I think they deserve to be because of the interference from regulating bodies I've suggested above.


This isn't a playground where everyone gets an 'A' for showing up. Most will fail, some will have some success, but only one will win. Right now, that is Intel.

I don't need to be a 'fanboy' to see reality.

But you all are welcome to distort it as you see fit.

 

You are right about the first part. China is a good example of a government that doesn't rule by law and instead rules by decree. Luckily for Intel it is based in the US and deals with a government that for the most part respects its own laws. The only reason the US government or any of its auxiliaries would look into the matter would be if there was suspicion of Intel practicing behavior contrary to the law. And yes, your implication is that Intel is throwing AMD a bone, regardless of them being compelled or doing it willingly. There is simply no other way to interpret this rant:

"What they are doing is making sure a stupid gov't or other idiotic overseer doesn't break them up into a billion useless divisions that wouldn't be able to do what Intel is doing now: giving us amazing TOTAL performance (power, performance and price) that no one else can match or ever did in such a consistent and reproducible manner.

If meddling 'stupid'powers didn't have power over the so called 'free market' and Intel was allowed to chase the consumer and business customers as I'm sure they want to... sure, we'd be using much better platforms, I agree. But Intel would also be reaping the rewards of their hard work too - instead of having to share or being purposely crippled in the name of 'equality'."

Well, we know that monopolies are only good for the monopoly and are bad for everyone else. This has been shown time and time again in many scenarios throughout history. The monopoly makes out like a bandit and consumers end up getting a bad deal. That is why there are laws against obvious abuses and anti-competitive practices. I myself am a big proponent of the free market and I hate it when governments interfere. However, you need a lesson in what a free market is. A free market is when prices of goods and services are dictated by the free convergence of supply and demand. This works only with multiple buyers and multiple sellers. Once you have a monopoly, the monopoly controls the whole supply side, so they can set prices at will.

There are two types of monopolies. There are natural monopolies, which become a monopoly by offering the best product/service, by offering the best prices, etc. Then there are the regular monopolies that attain their status by creating artificial barriers to the market and act in a way so as to distort the free market. Currently Intel is more of the former, but it used to be heavily engaged in the latter, which is where I think a lot of feelings about this issue are stemming from. However, a natural monopoly is not illegal and although they can do a lot of funny business with supply and prices, there is a finite limit to what they can do before a competitor catches up. However, with how behind AMD is, Intel has little to fear for the foreseeable future.

Yes, Intel has pretty much won. And it really sucks for us all. Intel has a monopoly on most of the x86 processor market so it can do whatever it wants and consumers don't have a choice. With their current market position it is in their best interest as a profit seeking enterprise to do exactly what they are doing now. I think you are just deluding yourself when you make up excuses for Intel's classic monopolistic behavior.

 

Exactly, considering that Intel wanted to push BGA Skylake desktop chips, it's a clear sign where Intel's priorities are right now.

I swear, I don't care how much AMD sucks or whatever, the day Intel makes desktops chips BGA only is the day I go AMD and never look back, even if just out of principle. Intel can take their BGA garbage and shove it where the sun doesn't shine.

 

Intel is getting uber lazy directly due to the fact that they have no direct competition and absolute dominance of the market...

AMD just needs some capital infusion... i really hope someone buys them. Intel being as dominant as it is, is just so bad for all of us as consumers...

 

It's actually the opposite - the day someone buys AMD is the day it's all over.

The 2 remaining x86 licenses are not transferrable. If either of the companies who currently possess a license (AMD and VIA) is bought up by another company, their right to produce x86 processors immediately ceases. If that weren't the case, someone like IBM, Nvidia, Samsung, or heck, ATIC would've scooped up nearly-bankrupt VIA for this extremely valuable piece of intellectual property ages ago.

So sink or swim, AMD is all alone. Unless if they completely give up on x86, that is...