Sun 12 Oct 2008

RSS Feed

Edited by Paul Hales

Published by Incisive Media Investments Ltd.

Terms and Conditions of use.

To advertise in Europe e-mail here

To advertise in Asia email here.

To advertise in North America email here.

Join the INQbot Mail List for a weekly guide to our news stories:

Subscribe

Intel carves up the world into seven categories

Roadmappery Figuring it all out

INTEL NOW HAS seven discrete price points for systems with handy guides to each level. We hope you will find as much enjoyment reading about them as we did.

The ranges go from Atoms under $249 to fire-breathing Quads over $1200. These ranges comprise the Intel-Retail-World-As-We-Know-It-Program, also known as IRWaW-ChIMP. Here you have the lineup for 2H/08.

The low end is of course the Atom range up to $249, and it is a "Simple device for web-browsing". The CPU is an Atom 230 (1.60GHz) teamed up with the smashingly adequate 945GC chipset, 512M of memory and an 80G HD. The OS choices include XP and Linux, Vista is not an option. This means the category is the one safe one offered by Intel.

Going up from there, we have $350-450 Celeron category. It can have one or two cores, and the standard bearer is an E1400 on a G31, a Gig of memory, and a 160G HD. The Broken OS is the only choice here, but you have to wonder how MS allows this, G31 does not qualify for 'premium' status. What was horse-traded this time?

Going up $100 we have the dual core category with an E2220 and 2G of memory. This is said to do much more than the last category, but we aren't really convinced that running Vista on a G31 will do much of anything for anyone.

From there we completely skip $50 of market space to get to the $600-700 range, and this opens up the world of 'high definition'. The main way they do this is to offer the G45 as an option, but G43 will more likely rule the SKUs. Coupled with the E7300 CPU (2.66/1066/3M), it should do OK in providing the user with a black screen courtesy of Vista DRM. In HD.

A little up from there, we again lose some money to the black hole of marketing and land in the $800-1000 group. This is the first one that any enthusiast will care about because it couples an E8400 (3.0/1333/6M) to a G45 or P45 chipset. Go for the P45 with a discrete card, trust us here. They claim that this with 2G of RAM and a 500G HD will set you back under four digits, so who are we to question it?

If you are hell bent on spending those four digits, the next big leap for mankind gets you to a Q9400 (2.66/1333/6M), but otherwise it is the same. Most of that $200 will be eaten up by the $103 difference in CPU costs, but given that you get "Outstanding quad-core performance for visually intense gaming and media creation", how can you say no? Sell the kids if you must, but get one of these.

If you have more than one kid to sell, the greater than $1200 category is the one for you. It has no integrated GPU option at all and a Q9550 (2.83/1333/12M) on an X48. Intel recommends 3G of RAM and a 640G HD for some reason, enthusiast numbers all around. In any case, if $1201 buys you one of these, well, you could do a lot worse for a gaming box.

In general, Intel's 2H/08 breakdown makes a lot of sense, covering most of the bases. It is sad that the only time they mention Linux is the lowest end, you could whack $100 and a lot of malware off the top of every category without Vista. When the time comes for a new box, at least you will know what the Intel options are now. µ

Comments

Trolling...

Is the constant trolling about Vista really necessary? It's getting annoying.
posted by : Alexko, 15 May 2008

Alexko

Yes it is. Vista sucks.
posted by : Gordon, 16 May 2008

Vista

Does Vista stop being <insert strong expletive here>? No? Thought so...
posted by : azrael, 16 May 2008

Charlies Xp Fanboi.

Ever Since Charles Got Head run Over By Intels' Stanley in 2006, Charlie thinks Charlie works for Intel. Charlie, its your last Memory, Stuck in Colliodial Fear Reaction.

XP Sucks & Fact that Intel is forced to Use it on 945 chipset is proof enough that Microsoft mislead Public by claiming anything of 915 is OK.

Also Intel Demolishes 171,000 Vechiles yearly, Thats several Billions of Dollars YOU Pay for. How, well first Intel inside Your Auto, Then Your Auto Inside You, eh Charles. Then Intel Declares YOU & Your auto TS. Its Hard Knock Life.
Drashek
posted by : Ultie_MD, 16 May 2008

How necessary is the fastest gfx card?

I have come to think of this. How much gaming power is really necessary? Is the goal always to play on the highest resolution and max settings? For a casual/random gamer like me it doesn't mean everything. And if you don't play 3D-games at all, an integrated graphics is a better option, less heat and more battery power.

The Inquirer could do a test where a perfect "work" computer would be assembled. More ram, fast cpu, fast hdd, big (widescreen) display. That's all you need.
posted by : Casual reader, 17 May 2008

Damnit!!

I just read a "Drashek" comment again!! Why god why???
Yes more graphics! If all standard dells had decent graphics we could have LANs on a friday at work woohoo!! Ohh wait im the system tech that might be bad to LOL
posted by : DeadSouL, 19 May 2008
IThound
Search for solutions, reports & analysis

Newsletter signup



 

Top INQ Stories