Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Intel Technology Hardware

Intel to Drop Low-end Chipsets 191

Posted by CowboyNeal from the cheapskates-take-note dept.
SimilarityEngine writes "Intel is planning to terminate production of its 910GL, 915GL and 915PL chipsets by the end of August, as part of a shift in focus towards higher-spec products, possibly with support for new FSB architectures, multi-core processors and a host of other much-requested features relating to virtualisation and security."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel to Drop Low-end Chipsets More

Intel to Drop Low-end Chipsets

Comments Filter:

  • Now when you say "security" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:13PM (#13245630)
    Do you mean "security for the end user" or "security for Microsoft, to keep the end user from doing things which Microsoft does not want them to"?

    • Re:Now when you say "security" (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TCaM ( 308943 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:14PM (#13245637) Homepage
      They are talking about the former, while thinking about the latter.
    • seeing as how apple doesn't want to let you install osx anywhere you see fit, i would guess it is also security for apple.

      please don't mistake their DRM-lite as anything but bad for the end user.

      yeah it's their os and they can do anything they want but that doesn't change my views about them.

      let's try to be consistent.

      all media companies are heading towards DRM, against the wishes of their REAL users. the crap that MS is pulling is fucking unbelievable but not surprising. the slides/info came from an intel

      • VIA's stuff is really nice. Now, I have no expectation that they won't implement DRM, but if they don't I see no reason why they wouldn't be an option for mid-range applications.

    • Re:Now when you say "security" (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:41PM (#13245834)
      > Do you mean "security for the end user" or "security for Microsoft, to keep the end user from doing things which Microsoft does not want them to"?

      The latter. You are not the customer, and neither Intel nor AMD are the vendors.

      Microsoft is the vendor. Intel and AMD are the customers. The guy who actually sits behind the keyboard is the product.

      • Not quite, the chipset is the product. Microsoft is the customer; Hollywood, Adobe, web sites, and a few others are microsoft's customer; You are Hollywood et. al's customer, not the product.

        I.e., you are their customer's customer's cusotmer. That's why they pay at least lip service to you.
    • New processors (both Intel and AMD) support the ability to have a page of memory that is readable and writable, but not executable. That's the whole NX, and execute disable thing you've seen on Slashdot. What this does is effectively prevent many kind of buffer overflows from being dangerous, since they overflow into an area of memory that isn't marked executable.

      So at least some of what Intel is doing with their new chips is for the benefit of the consumer.
      • If you overflow the stack and overwrite a return value, or taint the variables to be doing what you want, you still get an exploit.

        Yes, it's harder. No, it's not a panacea.

  • Trusted computing? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Lehk228 ( 705449 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:14PM (#13245638) Journal
    anyone know if the remaining chipsets will contain the Trusted Computing chips?
  • Tell me it ain't so Intel :-(

  • hmm.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by aztracker1 ( 702135 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:18PM (#13245659) Homepage
    Well, this could be their response to lackluster sales of their new CPUs with dual cores... Though they could simply be using their shear force to move things forward to the next battlefield...

    Though, I'm more of an AMD fan myself, in some ways this is good news.. moving forward on dual core, and pentium M based processors.
    • It would be better for AMD and all of us if Intel would put x86-64 on all their new offerings, instead of just the very high end chips.
    • Perhaps they expect to sell so many x86 mac mini boards that making entry-level boards for Windows users won't be worth the resources it takes?

      Perhaps not

  • Its all about the Benjies (Score:4, Insightful)

    by BigMFC ( 592465 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:18PM (#13245663)
    I don't believe that the margins are worthwhile at all on the lower end chipsets. Sis/AMD/VIA provide really stiff competition in that arena... Its a sensible move on Intels part

    • Re:Its all about the Benjies (Score:5, Interesting)

      by mpapet ( 761907 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @07:09PM (#13245985) Homepage
      It does seem sensible, -today-.

      For tomorrow, are they abandoning the price point?

      If they are abandoning the price point because it's not rich enough for them, I think they've planted the seeds for yet another american powerhouse company to fail in 20 years or less.

      Unfettered and unwatched competition in the low-end will clobber them one day soon. I don't care how many uptainiums and Pentium M's they've got and how big their lead may be.

      A different way of saying it is that Intel needs to know how to make low-cost chips and effectively compete in these low margin high-volume segments. To be lean-and-mean like their competitors in this space is mandatory. Plus, the volume helps their more expensive product remain profitable.
      • Yes and no. First it does not seem to agree with intel strategy up to this point. They dont just sell CPUs, they sell TONS of electronic chips of all forms. So people shouldn't think of intel as a CPU company at all. So when intel pulls out of a segment and becomes less diverse, it seems to be a change of direction.

        Second, your stock can be rated based on profit _margin_ not just profit amount. So intel could sell off lots of low end business units, make less profit overall, but increase their profit m

      • For tomorrow, are they abandoning the price point?

        I don't think they're abandoning a price point - I would think their previously midrange products will fall into the low-end price point. I don't see why it's unusual that they're doing this. It's just like any of their processors - $800 at release, discontinued 4 years later when the same item falls below $80 MSRP and is a waste of time to produce. Hard drives are that way too, 10 years ago 1 GB was pretty good, but now you can't even buy one because


      • Good lord, slashdot.

        Never think critically when sensationalism(tm) will do.

        Intel isn't dropping support for their low end processor because they want to add "draconian Trusted Computing DRM". Intel isn't dropping support for their low end chips because "the profit isn't there". Intel isn't going away in 20 years.

        Let me see if I can say this clearly:
        INTEL IS NOT DROPPING THEIR LOW END CHIPSET.

        Intel's main focus is the 945 / 955 chipset. The 945 is the low end chipset, the 955 is the high end.

        The 915 / 925
      • And there came a great disturbance in the force -- as though millions of embedded applications were suddenly extinguished forever.

        Well, thank goodness that there ARE other chipset OEMs to work with other processor OEMs. Intel(TM) is a silly rabbit to relinquish ANY part of their domain, because that is (invariably) where their next marketing threat will (HAS!) come from.

        Intel(TM) rationale for such a move is bogus -- Intel and Microsoft (as monopolists) are not unlike a pulsar -- one (star) without the oth
    • I don't believe that the margins are worthwhile at all on the lower end chipsets. Sis/AMD/VIA provide really stiff competition in that arena... Its a sensible move on Intels part

      The margins are enough to sustain the market for the chipsets. I'm from a third world country and the market here is flooded with such sets.

      The problem isn't Intel itself but the vendors and the number of computer illiterate. Vendors easily pass off these low-end chipsets as 'high quality and the latest from Intel'. Remember, it

  • yeah (Score:2, Insightful)

    by hjf ( 703092 )
    just leave low-end to AMD. newsflash, intel: latin america and most of the world (the third world if you want) still needs low-end because of costs, so unless your high-end chips will cost the same as low-end you'll just be leaving the chipset market to SIS, VIA and the rest of cheap chip-makers. and knowing how bad these chips perform, people will just buy athlons for the same price (well, just like we used to do a couple of monts ago with athlon vs. p4).

    • Re:yeah (Score:3, Insightful)

      by piecewise ( 169377 )
      This really doesn't make much sense. THe point is that Intel is making this move to bump out low margin chips in an effort to sell higher margin chips while their fabs are at capacity. They won't be able to grow much unless they do this -- meanwhile, they are building many new plants. This is a smart move. Let the markets in these areas develop, and then in a few years move in with solid price cuts.

    • Re:yeah (Score:3, Insightful)

      by moosesocks ( 264553 )
      last time I checked, AMD was making every attempt possible to escape the chipset business. Intel doing the same isn't exactly news to my ears, other for the fact that intel sells a fair number of chipsets.

      personally, I don't see why this is a bad move at all. I personally like AMD's strategy:

      release a mid-range/high-end chipset when moving to a new architecture or introducing a significant new technology (DDR comes to mind), and then let Ali, SiS, nVidia, ATI, and Via copy it. This encourages innovation,
      • AMD was making every attempt possible to escape the chipset business

        As far as I know AMD has never really been in the chipset business. They will usually create a chipset for a new processor but then expect Via, Sis, and now Nvidia to pick up the business. Think of AMD's chipset as a reference, You will usually find very few mb's that use the AMD chipset.
        • True. AMD only makes chipsets when it's financially prudent for them to do so -- If Via, Sis, and NVidia can't/won't produce enough chipsets to meet demand for whatever reason, AMD steps in and produces their own.

          Had AMD launched the athlon without launching its own chipset, it would have been doomed to failure, as the vast majority of the industry was extremely skeptical of AMD at that point. The 751 chipset was essential to the success of the athlon, and was used almost exclusively for about a year unt
      • Whhhhhattttt?

        AMD hasn't left the Chipset business at all. In fact, they're so wrapped around the chipset business, they're moving the whole damned chipset inside of the processor! Memory controllers, tomorrow brings PCI Express. The day after that? You get the picture eh?

        AMD's strategy is "throw the baby out with the bathwater"; make a platform where every release requires you to buy a new motherboard, which means huge revenues for all involved. But this is alright, because nobody cares to open up a P

  • Why doesnt the summary mention... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by imsabbel ( 611519 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:24PM (#13245715)
    that intels chipset fab are at their limit and they are simply dropping their lowest margin products?
    (its even in the article)

    • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @07:05PM (#13245964)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • ...and why doesn't the article mention 945GZ/PL? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MojoStan ( 776183 ) on Friday August 05, 2005 @12:11AM (#13247306)
      The CNET article doesn't even mention the upcoming Intel chipsets (945GZ and 945PL) that are supposed to replace the current low-end chipsets that are being phased out, according to a July 12 DigiTimes article [digitimes.com]:
      • 945GZ: GMA 950 graphics w/o PCI Express x16 slot. Replaces 910GL and 915GL. Samples being delivered to motherboard makers in late July. Volume shipments in 4Q05 or 1Q06.
      • 945PL: Low-end version of 945P. Replaces 915PL. Samples delivering July or August. Volume shipments in September 2005.

      From the CNET News.com article:

      The move, expected to take place by the end of August, could delay shipments of low-end PCs from various manufacturers for a couple of months.

      Sources close to the chipmaking giant's dealings confirmed reports that Intel would shutter production of its 910GL, 915GL and 915PL chipsets.

      Does CNET even know about 945GZ and 945PL? The article seems to be implying that, after the current low-end chipsets are phased out, Intel will exit the low-end chipset business. Are 945GZ and 945PL being cancelled? If not, will supplies of current low-end chipsets run out months before 945GV and 945PL ship in volume?

  • Reminds me of GM/Ford/Chrysler (Score:5, Interesting)

    by putko ( 753330 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:38PM (#13245805) Homepage Journal
    In the 90s the American carmakers got out of the low-marign car business, and moved with all their gusto to the high margin trucks and SUVs.

    This was a disaster, and only now are the chickens coming home to roost. Already Chrysler is history, and we are all just wondering whether Ford or GM will be next to go. And now the Germans, Japanese and Koreans compete with them in the high end -- there is nowhere else to go. I guess cars like the Maybach are even higher margin, but the Americans can't economically build it (nor something like a Lamborghini).

    So Intel better be makign some new, super-breakthrough stuff, that the other guys just don't have at all -- or the current high-margin business will become medium and then low-margin; at which point VIA will eat them alive.

    Japanese companies understand that you need to keep on making stuff, even low margin stuff, if only to stop the other folks from entering your citatdel and killing you one day. A bit like Cisco making cheapo stuff (Linksys) to keep the wolves at bay. You've got to get through Linksys before you can attack Cisco.
    • exactly, while AMD (Toyota/Honda) are cranking out faster fabs (hybrid vehicles mass-produced at lower cost), Intel (GM/Ford/Chrysler) are cranking out bigger and bigger chips (SUVs).

      and then they wonder where the market went.

      look, when I was buying my current laptop, I realized the main limits on my using it were:
      1. wireless speed
      2. battery life
      3. memory
      4. how many firewire/USB ports I could use

      So I ended up spending $800 on a reconditioned AMD 3300 chip based eMachine with 11b/g wireless and 512MB of RAM

    • Re:Reminds me of GM/Ford/Chrysler (Score:5, Informative)

      by guacamole ( 24270 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @07:06PM (#13245969)
      I think you're mostly right with the car industry analogy except for this.

      Already Chrysler is history, and we are all just wondering whether Ford or GM will be next to go.

      Perhaps Chrysler is a history as an independent US corporation but it is not history in its function as the North American branch of Daimler Chrysler after merging (some say being taken over by) with Mercedes Benz. Last year, was the first year Chrysler not only finished in blue ink but they also turned a decent profit. And recently (before the loss making discounts of GM and Ford) they were the only company to gain a significan market share together with some Japanese and Korean rivals. This revival is probably due to introduction of a few new attractive models such as Crysler 300M or Dodge Charger (which surely were designed with the help of their German bosses). This demonstrates that even North American car makers and strive and make profits as long as their design cars that don't suck.
      • US cars/trucks are under rated at the moment, they are better then they are percieved to be.

        Japanese cars/trucks are spot on. Their perception of quality matches their actual quality.

        European cars/trucks are over rated. They have far less quality then is perceived.
        • Europeans cars are just 25% too expensive right now because the Euro is 25% overvaluated (because of careless US economics).

          Everything imported from Europe is overvaluated right now.
          • It's not just the price; European cars have real quality problems. When VW and Porsche lose out to Kia [jdpower.com], something is wrong. And Hyundai beat Mercedes Benz.

            Now I have heard the excuse that customers of fine automobiles are simply more finicky, so the direct comparison is unfair. But look who's at #1 - Lexus.

            • East Asian cars are simply the best road cars you can buy.
              Whilst the American manufacturers i believe took the "You will need to upgrade every few years" route in hopes of bolstering business .
              The Japanese , and basically all the east Asian manufacturers took the route of cheap affordable quality that runs and runs .
              Now it may not seem as economically sound at first to kill off a future market by making your cars tanks that require little maintenance and run for years , but what they realised is that qualit
              • Intel can't afford to lower the quality of their products: lower quality manufacturing results in lower yields; worse performance from the chips themselves will make resellers think about alternative processors.

                A note of interest: Mercedes has upped their production quality in the last year or so and their machines are more reliable now. In Europe, we can buy Skodas (former Czech national automobile company renowned for terrible quality) which, since their purchase buy VW, are just Skoda-branded Vee-dubs w
                • Im in Germany , though i must admit the Mercedes was 3 years old or so .
                  Skodas are fine cars nowadays ;) so many good jokes are now totally lost , but we still have Ladas.
                  Skoda is a good example of how a companies image can be totally changed by an increase in quality
                  .
                  I agree on the part about Intel , its a shame they have to lose the low end parts but at least that will make future reintroduction easier when and if they increase their fabrication capacity.
                  That said VIA make fine chips these days and so
              • Don't completely discount the quality of American cars. I'm driving an 8-year-old Mercury, assembled in Kansas City, MO. 160,000 miles on the odometer. The engine and power train run as smooth as the day it was built.

                It has needed tires and suspension work. New shocks/struts all around. The AC is getting weak. It'll need a recharge next year.

                It will run for years.
        • Detroit needs to understand one thing: When carmakers focus on quality, the customers focus on ugly.

          GM might make some very great quality cars, but they also make some very ugly cars, some "inoffensive" cars, and no beautiful cars. GM is going to be uglied to death.
    • Intel has a lower margin line - the Celeron - which they make out of every generation of chips. and they lack the capacity to make enough chipsets partially because they used the Centrino marketing campaign to get their chipsets in a higher percentage of notebooks...

      As for a car analogy - right now Intel is making a line of very highly efficient, high MPG^Wpower-per-watt chips (the Pentium-M) and a line of gas^Wpower guzzling Pentium 4's. There are two main reasons that they haven't put the P4 aside yet -
    • There's a reason that the American auto industry in such a bad situation now and it doesn't have anything to do with low margin vehicles.

      The big American car companies can't engineer themselves out of a paper bag.

      That's all. There's no excusable reason why a Ford should be expected to need serious repairs at half the milage of a Toyota of the same price. That, and the Toyota will have a better fit and finish. The only reason the citadel has been breached is because the domestic manufacturers tore down the w
      • The big American car companies can't engineer themselves out of a paper bag.

        Well, that explains Ford's problems, but not GM's. GM cars have a far better and more reliable powertrain than Ford, or Toyota.

        That, and the Toyota will have a better fit and finish.

        I don't know where you get that idea from. The details are really where American cars look good.
        • I don't know where you get that idea from. The details are really where American cars look good.

          My niece bought into a used car some time back. Not very used... a Mitubishi something or another... 1999 or so... $5000 there and abouts, under 60,000 miles. She bought this thing because it was pretty and because for the most part Japanese cars are more reliable than their american counterparts. Well... as it turns out this Mitubshi has a Crysler engine... and those puppies need a head rebuild after about 50
          • That may have been true in the past, but the fact is that the entire industry has changed over the last 20 years. While US brands still haven't matched Honda and Toyota as far as quality, according to CR, they are getting much closer. My Ford Taurus has 110,100 miles and it has required neither major engine work nor major transmission work. I replaced the plugs at 100,000, but other than that, it's just been air filters, tire rotation, and fluid changes.
          • Well, if you're going to get a used Buick, get a Regal. Pretty nice car, quite reliable. When Buick discontinued it, the average reliability of the whole Buick lineup took a nice drop.

            Another good American car to get is the Chevy Prism. The Prism is nothing other than a Toyota Corolla with some minor trim differences. But since people think Chevy=junk, it's a great way to pick up a Toyota at a bargain price.

            But whatever you do, stay away from Dodge/Chysler/Plymouth. They haven't made decent car in yea
            • Well, if you're going to get a used Buick, get a Regal. Pretty nice car, quite reliable. When Buick discontinued it, the average reliability of the whole Buick lineup took a nice drop.

              Had I known that 10 years ago, I would have told my father to buy them rather than two 1984 buick Century's. Both low milage sub 100,000... both decided to overheat one day even though the waterpump and everything was working and never drove another mile in their life. Got him a Camry after the last Buick died.

    • I guess cars like the Maybach are even higher margin, but the Americans can't economically build it (nor something like a Lamborghini).

      Why would that be? Do you know where the Maybach is built? In Germany, one of the most expensive countries in the world in terms of labour cost.

  • Could be a good thing, (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ratatask ( 905257 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:45PM (#13245849)
    This might turn out good, as it hopefully will allow the "high" end chips to be manufactured and sold in bigger quantities.
    Which ought to lead to cheaper prices.
    More bang for the buck for /us/.

  • Whatever. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Council ( 514577 ) <rmunroe&gmail,com> on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:48PM (#13245864) Homepage
    possibly with support for new FSB architectures, multi-core processors and a host of other much-requested features relating to virtualisation and security.

    I think I speak for the entire Slashdot readership when I say:

    We don't care about computers anymore. It was a fad, it's over. Whatever. Let's move on with our lives.

  • FSB licensing vs. in-house production. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by epiphyte(3) ( 771115 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @06:55PM (#13245909)
    Just because they aren't making low-end chipsets doesn't mean they won't be getting chipset revenue from the low end. As even the cheaper processors move to multi-core, shared L3, multi-CPU capable, etc, the complexities of producing an unlicensed chipset will become more and more prohibitive. Assuming AMD can be squeezed out (Intel seems to be making good progress there), then if you want to make a chipset for any kind of low-end PC, then you'll need an FSB license from Intel. They'll likely make more money out of the licensing than they would from the tedious business of designing/making/marketing/selling/supporting the chips themselves.

  • Intel is Low End (Score:4, Insightful)

    by krakrjak ( 227602 ) <krakrjak.gmail@com> on Thursday August 04, 2005 @07:01PM (#13245939) Homepage
    Except for the Itanium2 which is sort of a running joke, everything Intel has out there right now is low end. The only great product they have on the market is the Pentium-M. Their Dual-Core is a joke, both in architecture and in heat/power consumption. IF you compare AMD's current products (Opteron x65/70/75 line and the Dual Core 64's) to intel's best offerings, there is no comparison AMD wins hands down in almost all categories. The categories that matter to me there is not a real choice AMD runs away with it.

    Also has anyone gotten SLI mode to work for a workstation on an Intel platform? Last time I saw it attempted it couldn't be done reliably, at least not with Nvidia's solution. I wan't my servers to use the least amount of power, put out the least amount of heat, have the smallest footprint possible and have excellent performance. I can balance those with Dual Core Opterons and get something that comes in a great package. IBM/SUN/HP all sell those types of servers and Intel just can't touch them.
    • I wan't my servers to use the least amount of power
      We have a winner for "Most Creative Spelling Mistake."

    • Dude. You're retarted.

      Intel fabircates chips, from the Celeron to the Itanium. Celeron and Pentium are low end, Xeon and Itanium are high end. That's it, there's no mystery here. Name people who manufacture higher end processors than a Xeon? Opteron, PowerPC, Sparc, Alpha. The combined market share of those doesn't touch the Xeon, and some of them may not even be as good, depending on what you're doing.

      Amd does make the faster stuff at the moment, but it's a constant leapfrog game. Intel's dual core
      • You're trolling, but...

        Name people who manufacture higher end processors than a Xeon?

        Intel's FABs are very nice, so only really AMD & IBM I'd suspect as they are the only ones with the real drive to keep up with this sorta tech.

        I think you'll find AMD's processors have far lower leakage than any 90nm Xeon though.

        The combined market share of those doesn't touch the Xeon, and some of them may not even be as good, depending on what you're doing.

        So? Windows has the most market share in the OS market, and I

  • Not quite true... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Hack Jandy ( 781503 ) on Thursday August 04, 2005 @09:17PM (#13246544) Homepage
    This is actually just a phase out of older chips. A year ago Intel did the same with their "low end" 865 chipsets. At the time, 865 wasn't really low end.

    I am a little surprised CNet spun a regularly scheduled product cycle into "Intel pulling out of the low end market". What about their 945P/G chipsets? Aren't they launching a low end 945GZ chipset in the next few months as well to replace 915P/G? Little details that don't make for very interesting headlines I suppose....

    HJ
  • Well, get rid of your Intel stock. Now that they don't have time for the cheap, simple chips, I really think their days are numbered. Any time a large company abandons the low end, it is a sign that they are not hungry anymore and can't be bothered with innovation, since it typically happens from the low end and migrates to the higher end product lines later. Think about RISC processors. One of the big draws to them was the fact that they are very cheap, fast, dumb devices. Even though everyone thinks they

  • Supply Problems... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by evilviper ( 135110 ) on Friday August 05, 2005 @02:08AM (#13247676) Journal
    Why is the /. mantra that AMD has supply problems, while Intel supposedly has excess capacity? This story outlines Intel's current shortages, even though the PR guy spun it like it's just a regular occurance...

    Why do stories about Intel opening a new fab get posted to /. numerous times, while stories about AMD opening a new fab don't even get a mention?

    I get the feeling this story wouldn't be here if the submitter had made it about Intel's supply problems, rather than the retirement of a few low-end chips?
  • All it takes is one call from WilliamSoft Chief Architect William H. Gates III and Wintel suddenly decided that low end hardware which does not support Vista will no longer be manufactured.

    Gee who didn't see that one coming?

Slashdot Top Deals

To be is to program.

Close