Intel to Discontinue Pentium 4 Extreme Edition Processor
Posted by malebolgia on 07 August 2004 - 22:23 · 28 comments & 1767 views
About the Author
Full name: Unknown
Forum name:
malebolgia
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Unknown
Forum name:
malebolgiaContact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
(1 reply)
#1 Posted by Yuxi on 07 Aug 2004 - 22:24
- I thought EE just started to go on sale not too long ago...
-
(2 replies)
#2 Posted by ChaosBlade on 07 Aug 2004 - 22:40
- It was a CPU to temp. compete against AMD's 64bit CPU's ..
But now that newer Intel procs are coming out no reason to sale these anymore. -
#2.1 Posted by Grappa on 09 Aug 2004 - 16:45
- I.e., nobody was buying them because they were ridiculously overpriced.
-
(1 reply)
#3 Posted by xMorpheousx416 on 07 Aug 2004 - 23:39
- At $1,000 each, who the hell wanted one anyways? Yeah, they were created to compete against AMD's 64bit CPU. Pretty lame actually, ...and it lost anyways to the biggest reason....Games. AMD whooped Intel's EE up oneside and down the other in games. Who cares that it ran Excel faster...
lol -
#3.1 Posted by theyarecomingforyou on 08 Aug 2004 - 01:35
- Exactly... it aimed to give more performance, but the price was very steep for a nominal performance gain. AMD64's have proved themselves as better for gaming and Intel needs an action plan - they need to cut down on delays and production problems.
Also, they need to stop being too flaming expensive. AMD64's are cheaper AND offer better performance... especially in games like Doom 3, where (on Anandtech) AMD completely trashed Intel for performance.
I like competition, and wish that Intel would get it's act together and become more competitive (rather than just doing dodgy deals to force manufacturers to not supply AMD).
-
(1 reply)
#4 Posted by open_coder on 07 Aug 2004 - 23:45
- I don't think its worth the hassle anyway. AMD is much better now that 64-bits are popular.
-
(3 replies)
#5 Posted by memodude on 08 Aug 2004 - 00:10
- Intel isn't discontinuing the P4EE processor. They are only discontinuing the 3.2 GHz model in mPGA478 packaging.
Intel is leaving the 3.4 and 3.6 GHz processors in LGA775 packaging alone.
Last edited by 25569 on 08 Aug 2004 - 02:20 -
#5.1 Posted by kawai on 08 Aug 2004 - 00:12
- that's right, the wording is confusing as hell
someone've just spotted the new LGA version of P4EE @ 3.4Ghz this week
-
#5.2 Posted by Jstphish on 08 Aug 2004 - 00:50
- Same thought here, especially since Intel just announced the 1066MHz FSB.
-
(9 replies)
#6 Posted by Steffan on 08 Aug 2004 - 01:41
- Doesn't everyone know the price break down for an Intel cpu?
99.9% of the price is the name "Intel"
00.1% of the price is the actual cpu
They also charge for each letter of the cpu. -
#6.1 Posted by neufuse on 08 Aug 2004 - 01:50
- you know how much money Intel puts into research projects compared to what AMD does? what you are paying for is research into new technologies and things you will see on processors in the future... AMD also depends a lot on Intel's research department, AMD and Intel have a pact between them to share research info, which Intel pays aprox 85% for currently compared to AMD's 15% in the research
-
#6.2 Posted by episode on 08 Aug 2004 - 04:54
- Wooohoooo!! Go people that actually know things and not just blither like idiots!
-
#6.4 Posted by Turbonium on 08 Aug 2004 - 12:47
- I know something valid: EE is overpriced somewhat, lol.
But honestly, if I was like really really rich, as in too rich, I'd get an EE if I was building an Intel PC, just to say I have one. -
#6.5 Posted by Sub on 08 Aug 2004 - 15:26
- And AMD 64 bit chip arr'nt overpriced...right???
$755 for the lowest brand.
$999 for the top brand. -
#6.6 Posted by noll3095 on 08 Aug 2004 - 16:36
QUOTE And AMD 64 bit chip arr'nt overpriced...right???
Athlon 64 2800 - $140
Athlon 64 FX 53 939 - $824
You were talking about AMD being over priced right? Or am I missing something?-
#6.7 Posted by Trek234 on 08 Aug 2004 - 18:47
- Research huh? That must be why AMD floors Intel in the benchmarks. That must be why AMD has an intergrated on chip memory controller and Intel doesn't. That must be why AMD has successfully made the leap to 64-bit and Intel hasn't.
What has Intel research innovation achieved? Oh that's right - higher and higher clock speed to compete with a superior architecture instead of creating their own superior architecture. I'm sure several million a month is spent on heat sink research so that the massive P4 overclock idiocy can continue.
So yea, I can understand why so much would be spent on research considering it hasn't gotten them a damn thing yet. Usually you call mass expensive research that yields NO results to be a blundering failure rather than making it sound to be something understandable. -
#6.8 Posted by xStainDx on 08 Aug 2004 - 21:05
- Hrmm.. that AMD Processor you use sure has a lot of Intel Research in it.. I mean they did create the whole x86 instruction set...hrmm... nope no Intel research at all!.
-
#6.9 Posted by Radium on 09 Aug 2004 - 01:04
- Trek234, do you know what kind of research we are talking about?
64-bit and hypertransport are just tiny steps that almost anyone can make.
Do you think that the whole 64-bit stuff is all AMD's own ideas? Far from it.
Is NX AMD's stuff? No! XD technology have existed in Itanium since day one and UltraSPARC, PA-RISC and possibly Alpha have had it for a very long time, long before Intel.
How do you think Intel were funding the Itanium project (VLIW/EPIC) while it was beeing developed for like 10 years?
What about the i860 and the i960?
How did Intel fund the 3GIO project (PCI Express)?
What about AGP?
They have funded far more projects than AMD!
Who created the first commercially used processor? Who created x86?
Both Intel (196
and AMD (1965) originate from Fairchild Semiconductor.
We should thank Intel for pushing the researching forward.
Stop bitching about things like this, we should all be grateful that both Intel and AMD is sticking around.
x86 and processors aren't the center of universe!
Like any other big corporation, you have to take money from the segments that make money and put them into segments that need money.
-
(1 reply)
#7 Posted by MitchShrader on 09 Aug 2004 - 08:39
- Hmm. I have 6 AMD comps, build exclusively with AMD, and it doesn't have a darn thing to do with fanboyz.. Soon as Intel gets competitive on their midrange processors, and stops trying to give my customers money to THEIR stockholders, I'll be more'n happy to switch. Long as they cultivate their biggest customers and ignore the smallest ones, the smallest ones will be counting the pennies and buying AMD.. happily.
-
(1 reply)
#8 Posted by CyberWolf on 09 Aug 2004 - 19:47
QUOTE
you know how much money Intel puts into research projects compared to what AMD does? what you are paying for is research into new technologies and things you will see on processors in the future... AMD also depends a lot on Intel's research department, AMD and Intel have a pact between them to share research info, which Intel pays aprox 85% for currently compared to AMD's 15% in the research
what??? Absolutely untrue. What your misguided post is referring to is the cross licensing agreement between AMD and INTEL. Where they agreed to share certain technologies and either could use said technologies with no licensing restrictions. Each company has their own R&D and their own budgets. There is no master lab where intel and amd work together that is funded by both companies...-
#8.1 Posted by rafter109 on 10 Aug 2004 - 01:00
QUOTE what??? Absolutely untrue. What your misguided post is referring to is the cross licensing agreement between AMD and INTEL. Where they agreed to share certain technologies and either could use said technologies with no licensing restrictions. Each company has their own R&D and their own budgets. There is no master lab where intel and amd work together that is funded by both companies...
Good job CyberWolf, AMD and Intel independently fund their own projects as well as working groups on projects such as hypertransport, sata, pci-x, and many others. If any information is shared betweeen companies on cpus, its between AMD and IBM. If i could find that dag gone article I'd prove that the G5 and Athlon 64 being backward compatable is no coincididence. In fact, IBM was at one time leasing space to AMD for prototype development while sharing x86-64 technologies.
-
#9 Posted by kitchenutensils on 10 Aug 2004 - 12:26
- isnt that kind of anti competitive the agreement? i mean it gives any other company absolutely no chance in the market - and the situation with only 2 companies (AMD + Intel) would make you think that its true?
“Market demand for the Intel Pentium 4 processor Extreme Edition supporting Hyper-Threading technology 3.20GHz with 800MHz processor system bus in mPGA478 packaging has shifted to higher performance Intel processors,” the company said it its statement sent to clients. The last product discontinuance order date for the chip is 19th of November, 2004. Last shipping dates for the chips are February 18, 2005, and July 29, 2005, for boxed and tray versions respectively.
Cont...
America's 10 Most Wanted is a fast-paced first-person shooter that will challenge you to use not only use your firepower but also balance analytical prowess and physical strength to gather clues and question contacts.
How to enter:
Simple. Submit your score online at americas10mostwanted.com. From the home page simply click on Competition and follow the on-screen headings for registering your score. You will also find a form in every games box with a postal address to which you can also submit your score. The closing date for entries is 21 August 2004.
All players must be 16 or older. Top scorers will be required to provide proof of their score either with a video, photo or memory card. The judge's decision is final. No correspondence will be entered into.