lol AHHAHAHAH IM SCREEWWEEEDD!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
It didn't make sense because Nehalem was already under development. Though a monolithic die without an IMC would have been a lot easier.
Again, logistically it would have been very bad for Nehalem to be produced on 65nm. And in a lot of ways, Nehalem is like Phenom.

Core 2 wasn't developed quickly. It just appeared on the market suddenly, and surprised people.
It was a fairly smooth transition from the Core Duo's (the first generation "core" chips), which were a fairly smooth transition from Pentium M's.

They wouldn't have wanted people to have a very advanced warning that a new CPU was coming out. that would have prematurely killed Pentium 4 sales a lot before the Core 2 would have even come out.

It would have been pointless for them to release two new architectures at 65nm and nehalem was far from ready at that point.

Core 2 may not have been announced much before it's launch but it was hardly the direction Intel intended to take. If you look at their older roadmaps you can see that there were more versions of the netbourst architecture planned after cedar mill but AMD's superior Alon 64's and athlon x2's fored them to develop a competitive product
 
It would have been pointless for them to release two new architectures at 65nm and nehalem was far from ready at that point.
Supposing Intel hadn't had 45nm as early, it still wouldn't have been logistically feasible to make Nehalem on 65nm.
Core 2 Quad would be different, with its lack of an IMC though. Had Nehalem not been in the works, it would be much more likely they'd consider a monolithic die then.

But I read somewhere that Intel said (not just implied, or by 3rd party technical or financial analysis) that a monolithic 65nm die wouldn't be feasible.
Core 2 may not have been announced much before it's launch but it was hardly the direction Intel intended to take.
At what point?
I'm quite sure Core 2 was planned significantly before they're willing to admit.
I mean, Netburst definitely was the direction Intel intended to take at one point... before they realised how badly it was actually doing.
 
Apok, you place way to much emphasis on an IMC. It's not the holy grail of cpu design. Intel was able to pump out the Core2 so fast because it was a logical progression from Baninas. Intel has a much larger R&D department than AMD and can create things much quicker. Intel was going for Tejas until the spring of 2004. And by 2005 they had the Pentium M to a mature state where they could derive Core2. Merom hit the scene in 2006. That is about 1 or 2 years on Core 2.
 
Alright till Trotter can come by and give final word i am closing this. It was meant to be a light hearted thread and it turned ugly once everyone started to debate CPU's.

Everyone has their own opinion. So till Trotter can rule it is closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom