Slashdot Mirror
2Ghz P4 Shown Off
mduell writes "Intel showed off their newest, fastest chip ever. The Pentium 4, running at 2 Ghz uses 400MHz Rambus Direct RAM(ugh). They also demo'd an Itanium server cluster running Linux with failover protection (what does this have to do with the chip?). Additionally, a 1Ghz P3-Xeon and a new 500Mhz mobile P3 that uses just 850 milliwatts when running most applications (5.5W max) were shown."
Don't forget - having faster chips released will bring down the prices of the 'low' end processors and enable Joe public to afford what was very recently a high end machine.
Most people won't afford a 2GHz machine, but the pricing implications mean that a previously out of reach 933 / 1 GHz migh be that bit more affordable.
True. I went from 5400 RPM to 7200 RPM on the spindle speed. (I hadn't thought about that until you mentioned it.) (Actually the old 4GB I had in there was about 4 years old. I don't even know what the speed on it was/is. I have an old Maxtor 540 if anyone wants it for historical purposes. :))
;)
*ponder* I don't know though. Above and beyond faster speed I feel like ATA/66 is making a diff. Probably a psychological effect.
-- Talonius
My reality check bounced.
What we need is better architecture (the kind that is not designed only to allow for faster clock rates but for efficient processing), NO RDRAM, faster bus speeds (the memory bandwidth is becoming a serious problem)
This seems to be marketing hype on Intel's side as usual. I think the K-6 to Athlon was a better jump than the p3 to p4. So far, AMD seems to be heading in the right direction. Wonder if they'll pull the carpet from under Intel's feet this time as well.
Maybe it's time we stopped pushing the single processor market and went the cheap-multiprocessor way.
Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
Comparing instructions-per-clock is exactly as pointless as comparing MHz. What matters is how many instructions it can execute per second (or better, how fast it executes your favourite program).
Since the longer pipeline has enabled them to double the clock speed, it seems like a good tradeoff. It may not be the only workable approach, but it's pretty obvious that the PIII architecture has been pushed as far as it'll go.
--
--Fesh
"Citizens have rights. Consumers only have wallets." - gilroy
--Fesh
Kill -9 'em all, let root@localhost sort 'em out.
They used an 800MHz PIII because there seems to be a shortage of Pentium III processors shipping at speeds greater than 800MHz. Funny, even Intel can't get the chips they've been "shipping" for months.
I am so sick of waiting for a dual-AMD mobo. It has literally been two years now since I heard the rumours about "oooh, there will be a dual K6-3 mobo by spring". Why, pray tell, does the friggin' CELERON have a dual CPU board, (Abit BP-6) but the Athlon and Duron and K6-2/3 are singular? Supposedly the Athlon has parallel logic built in. I know I'd be buying more AMD chips if they had good dual processor support.
Free music from Jack Merlot.
And on the production end, faster processors will allow you to "paint" with all kinds of real-time funky effects. Right now, even with 800+ Mhz, this isn't feasible.
"We need to collectively work to decrease the overall power of the platform."
I think Microsoft is already doing enough work in that direction as it is, thank you very much...
Why doesn't annyone recon this.
Only gamers need such power..but..there havent been worthwile new game concepts since the intro of q2 multiplayer , all q2 engine based games perform ok on current 800mhz cpu's wuth decent 3d accelerator.
- --[... The secret of the hanged man, the smile on his lips... ]-- -
If you read the article, you will notice that while they are shipping Xeon chips at 1 GHz now, they are still unsure as to a time frame on 1 GHz P-IIIs. And this despite the recent "announcement" of 1.13 GHz p-III's. How can you "announce" and "release" a product when you can't even buy the previous generation yet?
Despite quantity shipments of 1 GHz Athlons and Thunderbirds, there is no real way to get a 1 GHz P-III. That makes all of this just another set of smoke and mirrors - Intel takes a few high quality pre-production chips and cranks them up for a demo. Then they ship a very limited quantity of 1 GHz server chips - of course, server chips are better cooled and maintained, are much more expensive, and are ordered in much lower quantities.
So Intel has still failed to answer the real question at hand - can they actually ship a 1 GHz chip for the desktop? Can they capitalize on their market entrenchment, product quality, and technical expertise (all of which are vast, no matter your position) Or have they put too much junk in the trunk, spent too much time optimizing an overloaded, antiquated core, and lost too much technical drive to overcome the AMD challenge? Because right now, these "announcements" and "demos" sound like the last gasp of a dying dinosaur and not sound development from the once-undisputed king of the PC chip world.
I cannot believe how funny that comment is.
They need faster ships
that's funny because ships rhymes with chips....and intel makes chips.
You haven't used Office 2000 on Windows ME yet have you?
Icebox
...little will run on my 233MMX libretto (think Linux is exempt? ever tried running GNOME on one of these?)
Well, I've tried on a Toshiba SS3000, which is basically a 233MHz Libretto in a B5 case, and it runs fine for me.
I believe that Intel can pull of decent volumes of P4's. Because of the new architecture, they won't have the same very low yield problems at high clock rates that the 6th generation had... remember, that core was designed to run at 150-200 mhz initially. This one is designed to run at 1.5-2 ghz initially, with the ability to bump it up significantly beyond that a major design consideration. It probably won't beat a P3 or Athlon at the same clock speed, but if they can keep a huge lead in clock speed over the competition (which at this point looks like a credible strategy), they may be able to have the faster chip anyway.
If you are modding me down because you disagree with me, use the "Flamebait" category, not the "Troll" one.
Damn the speed increase just shot up there..
how long ago was it since 1ghz was first released??
if this keeps up im just gonna wait for a 4ghz processor..
when everything is working perfectly.. BREAK SOMETHING before something else FUCKS up!
Well, let me answer that for you: 'why not?' and 'you do.'
Progress and innovation (remember that word everyone?) is not made by producing more of the same crap but by always pushing boundaries. A chip of that speed almost certainly means new tech, and those, while initially expensive, will filter down to the common masses to we can all enjoy it.
So stop whining already!
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
now toasters and ovens can have Web access, and don't even need the old inefficient heating elements...
How long will it take for M$ to bloat Windows so that you need one of these to run it?
I don't need a 2Ghz chip for anything I can think of. Why are people going to shell out large amounts of cash for these?
As with most of the recent AMD apologies, surely the most important question is "when is SMP going to actually be avaiable in the market."
Without a decent answer to that, all the AMD hype seems more like an attempt to create FUD to work against Intel than genuine advancements in the field.
-------
No, I'm not an Intel partisan. I just enjoy pointing out fscking hypocrites when I see them.
So let me get this straight... Intel are so confident of their new chips they feel having fallover protection is needed!? You gotta smile really. Chris H
Man, that's a cool idea!
(Oh no... I'm cracking puns again... s-s-somebody s-stop me!)
(Spudley Strikes Again!)
What we have here is a chip that should have been 1.5 Ghz, that was overclocked to run at 2 Ghz. What we have here is also a chip that won't get onto your desk or mine for another 6 - 12 months, and by the time we can get it, I don't think the chip can be overclocked anymore.
In other words, Intel is showing us a chip that they won't sell to us, period.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Man, you really deserve your name! ;-)
EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
You already do.
Icebox
I personally enjoy a little pearl of Emily tossed into the mix. Lighten up.
No sig? Sigh...
They need faster ships
...so we can have faster chips...
Hey - whaddya know - it rhymes!
(The mad poet strikes again! bwuahahahaha!)
(Spudley Strikes Again!)
Expect world temperature to sharply increase by next year.
Would that be because of all those hot chips, or all the bot-air being generated by their companies?
(or possibly a combination of these factors... could they be influencing each other perhaps? - the hotter their chips run, the more hot air comes from their PR departments...?>
(Spudley Strikes Again!)
yeah-
Motorola, where the fuck are you?
if it ain't broke, then fix it 'till it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
To which I simply reply "dumbass!!!". But what I truly mean with this is that this will probably drive Intel's stock price up simply because of the people I described above being stupid enough to buy into it.
Yhcrana
The voices in my head don't like you
Ya know, these things run Linux too. Think about it ;) *g*
How about something more strenuous, like a BSP compile job under Q3Radiant using -vis -light -extra -threads? I have the perfect level for that; it takes up almost all 8192 units (that's about 1/5 of a mile in real world standards), and right now, without a lightmap, it's 400K. It would take a hell of a long time to compile this baby, hehe.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
If I want I can order a Athlon 1 GHz today, but getting anything faster than a P3 800 is a real big problem.
:-)
It's time for Intel to get things sorted out, and start real mass production of the faster chips, since AMD is really winning at the moment (not that I regret that
Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
Actually despite being the original poster of that comment I hadn't actually noticed that there was any humour in the chips/ships thing.
:)
Oh well, i'll be Mr not-so-quick Today
Big deal my c64 can still kick its ass.
In response to number 2 on your list, There are many uses for this.
From video streamimg to 3d modeling to CAD to model predictions(weather, global temp... etc)
Personally I have been getting into video streaming, and this is the first time I've even considered upgrading my 450. It is very intensive. So I understand most apps won't 'need' this, and shouldn't need this, but there are markets for these outrages speeds.
I have friends that render stuff for there jobs, and the render time on a 700 is about 4-6 hours.
being able to shave a couple of hours off that would be a boon to there productivity.
as to yout number 1 point, I agree with yopu totally. I would be suprised if they where available dec of 2001
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I agree completely.
The point is that companies will lie to you. Always. They are whores of their shareholders or investors.
And surely Transmeta practises in spindoctoring, too.
Well, no chip that comes off the line is untested...
What I want? I want make it very clear that this thing is a demonstration of a handpicked chip.
Room temperature? I read something different.
The "mere existence of the 1.4GHZ P4"?
Hopefully this "existence" will be somewhat more real than the existence of the 1GHZ P3s.
Anyway. I dont really see what your problem is.
...they compared the 2000 MHz P4 with an 800 MHz P3...
But then we have AMD introducing their Mustang in Q4. While on paper the Mustang appears to compete with the Xeon, AMD is going to market it against the p4. Also, AMD appears to be moving to .13 micron faster than Intel. This is all speculation, but so is the release of the p4 at 2 ghz. I wouldn't count on it before summer of 2001.
However, give it something really regular like 3D, and it totally blows the Athlon away.
That depends on the graphic card industry, and how well the p4 actually competes with Nvidia's chips, etc.
Intel has the clock-speed advantage in terms of marketing.
True. The press has picked up on this 2ghz demo as if the thing was an announced product!
blessings,
"Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
--Tom Schulman
I had a similar experience with Word Perfect. Eventually I figured out that Word Perfect was really just a subtle and sophisticated video game that secretaries could play while at work.
If a 20 Stage Pipeline was a good move is to be seen. But the design takes the long latencies coming with a pipeline stall into account and tries to battle it at every front. This are better Branch-Prediction, ALUs working at double CPU core frequency and the Trace-Cache. since this is the first chip implementing a Trace-Cache i'm very interrested how this new cache model will influence performance.
To see how the new chip perform we will have to wait for neutral benchmarks. Perhaps it will not beat the Athlon clock by clock, but it will start with 1.5 GHz und will scale well beyond 2 Ghz this will make it the performance leader for some time.
About the floating point performance. IMHO Intel stopped beating the old x86 stack based FPU model to death and is walking along the way of SSE2. With a good optimizing compiler this will be pretty competitive. We can only hope Intel helps to get gcc to a point where it can optimize for the SSE Instructions as well as the Intel compilers.
thomas
L2: Wow so it's got twice the cache, a little over twice the clockspeed and a slighly higher bus speed than my OC'd celeron300 that I bought for pennies over a year ago.
The Xeon is a different animal. The cache is bound closer to the procesoor core to move data in and out even faster. However, most of my work only uses the 2MB cache version of the processor. That is where the performance really goes up, and the cost goes up even more.
One of my greatest personal accomplishments a couple of years ago was getting Linux to boot on a quad Xeon 400. Now there was a DES cracking monster.
World Beach List, my latest project.
Because it gets 398.21 BogoGIPS!
I have a positive modifier on Troll. When I mod someone Troll their karma should go UP!
I wondered how long it would take the Intel engineers to work their way through the DEC purchases they made and start using that technology in other areas. Given that a 200MHz StrongARM processor maxes out power consumption way below 1W (I have a feeling the figure is around 700mW) the power consumption of the Pentium processors looks pretty silly. Still there is no easy way to go from a streamlined low power consumption RISC design like the StrongARM and plunk all that technology into the Pentium line which requires a whole lot more transistors.
What I do take issue with is this 850mW figure for a 500MHz PIII. Intel's low power consumption tricks up till now have involved idling the processor when there isn't much happening, and I strongly suspect that this 850mW figure has a lot of idling in its measurement time frame. That figure of 5.5W max looks far more likely to really reflect the power consumption of the low power PIII. That is not to say that having a processor having various power consumption modes is a bad thing - the Amulet project has a more interesting take on this one (variable asynchronous clock speeds) - but I do wish that Intel would be more 'honest' with its figures. As for the rest of the announcements, I just request that you don't hold your breath waiting for these to appear on the shelves.
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
As I sit here on my P3/550 with 512MB RAM running Win2K and Office2K - it's a PIG
mas cerveza, por favor politically incorrect stu
i like your site, minus the colors.
other than that, good info.
peace, fishface.
Folks,
From what we know about the Intel Pentium 4, it appears that the CPU is not optimized for something like Windows 95/98/ME, let alone desktop versions of Linux! It's better-suited for things that use large data sets, things such as large image files, large CAD/CAM drawings, and large databases, something more in the Windows 2000 or Linux server edition category.
I think people who will use Windows 98 SE, Windows ME and Linux desktop distributions will be far better off using the Celeron, Pentium III, Athlon and Duron CPU's.
It'll be interesting to see what the "Mustang" variant of the Athlon with its larger on-die L2 cache will do; if it is just a standard "Thunderbird" CPU but with a bigger L2 on-die cache it could become a great CPU for server machines (and will probably have the same pricing as the Pentium 4).
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
Perhaps it will not beat the Athlon clock by clock, but it will start with 1.5 GHz und will scale well beyond 2 Ghz this will make it the performance leader for some time.
Huh. By the time it ships AMD will be shipping K7's at the same clock speed, but with much better throughput. And sledgehammer is coming sooner than you think.
--
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Just as Transmeta's power figures are spin doctored too, or are you saying that Transmeta's too holy to lie? No... let's just wait til both companies are shipping actual products so we can see some reviews before saying who's lying and what not.
So now I'll be able to cook and eat my dinner without moving from the desk. Just hope it doesn't cook my nuts too.
And when are they gonna increase bus speed? A 2GHz cpu is going to be spending all of its time idle on a a 100 or 133MHz bus ...
--
"I find your lack of faith disturbing." -- Darth Vader
I've seen several posts here slamming the P4's 133 MHz bus. It should be noted that the P4 uses a quad-pumped connection to the north bridge of the chipset, so a 133MHz connection would actually deliver 533 Mbps per pin, for an overall yield of around 4.26 GB/s - not too shabby. Now, if they can just get rid of the rambus...
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
I thought IBM had scrapped that line and was taking the plant down?
Assumption first blinds a man, then sends him running
I think I need to try this with my .25 micron K7^H^HClassic Athlon, but I'm only going for 1.33Ghz so maybe, hehehehe ;p
'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
"Those are also the people who were most threatened when Windows 3.0 came out, and they were no longer the Prima Donna.
What a pity that computers become ever more easy to use. "
Computers know are more difficult to used than ever. And also your local "guru" is not only the prima donna, he gets more money than you.
Now you have dll's, disk to defrag, hundred's of virus, the normal "blue screen of death of microsoft", etc.
And bill is getting reach taking the your money..
what a sucker...
OverLord
What a sucker....
Programmers are busy writing the next best idiot proof software. The universe, in the meantine, is busy making the next best idiot. The universe is winning.
I remember watching the first press conference from Transmeta (where Linus and Dave Taylor played Quake) and the "benchmarks" they were spouting. The Slashdot response was pretty evenly divided between "I want one tomorrow" and "what was up with those bullshit benchmarks?".
-B
Given the news that Intel is unable to provide Xeon processors in sufficient quantity to folks like Compaq (story in WSJ today, on the Register back on monday), even the demo of such a chip in a non-rigged demonstration probably means nothing. There aree all of 8 sellers of the 1 Ghz Pentium over on pricewatch. The price is over 1k$, there are close to 50 sellers of the 1Ghz Athlon. Lowest price by several vendors under $500. Somehow, just somehow, this move by Intel is worthy of the Russian Navy effort to rescue the submariners. Lots of chutzpah, lots of pride, not much worthy of any note. Kyrotech is expected to finish its 2Ghz Athlon by q4, I dare say that it will be available, cheaper and all the rest long before this chip ever sees the light of day.
I don't know what your problem is, but Word 2000 runs fine on my P200 w/64MB RAM.
Sorry if my comment sounded offending, I didn't mean it to. It looked just so obvious to me ...
yeah, peace!
EagerEyes.org: Visualization and Visual Communication
>Google results 1-10 of about 65,400,000 for b. Search took 0.04 seconds.
;-)
Hey! My search took *Twice* as long as your's did! Man, Google is slipping.
"Google results 1-10 of about 65,300,000 for b. Search took 0.08 seconds"
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
If I understood correctly from posts (I couldn't read it, netscape keeps requiring kill -9 when it gets there.) It uses a real fast core, and the same 133MHz bus. This would us a HUGE multiplier.
RDRAM, is not the only one for the P4 (see the earlier discussion on P4s). SDRAM still lives in Intel products. RDRAM may have a little performance gain over SDRAM, but is it worth the cost? Judgeing from Intel's inclusion of SDRAM, I would say no.
32-bit. My 486 from 1989 or so is 32-bit. Why??? 64-bit Alphas have been around since 486s. When is IA-64 really comming out?
Massive MHz (or in this case GHz), but how does it compare with a P3 or Athlon in perfomance per MHz? or for that matter, an Alpha.
Low watts. Great, but does it have the reduced clock speed when not plugged in to a wall outlet.
P3s Athlons, etc. have been RISC, but they translate the instructions in hardware, requiring lots of extra transistors, and making them run hotter.
When is this "due" out. I am guessing that it is only a test processor, and not a final (release) processor. So when is it due out, and will it be like the 800MHz+ P3's avalability or IA-64's, due in 1999, release.
As I couldn't see the whole article, feel free to correct me.
I like announcements like this. It means that faster processors are on the way, which will drop the price of the current crop. Within 6 mos I hope to see the price of P3@800 become low enough so that I can afford to replace the two P2@450 CPUs in this machine without breaking the bank. Perhaps there will be a BIOS update for my motherboard by then that will allow me to go a little faster. I'm gettting rather tired of sitting around waiting for MSVC6 and SQL Server to do their thing (although parallel builds would be nice under Winders).
Yeah I appreciate the Xeon is more than a souped up celeron, but it's also less than a scaled down ultrasparc.
I was more taking the piss of the way that these marketing people latch onto numbers like those and tout them as key sales points when in fact they are meaningless.
This new xeon after all has half the cache of a pentium ii....?
Okay, here is the deal. If Intel can pull of the manufacturing of this thing, the 2GHz chip will not be far off. Meanwhile, I doubt it is possible for the .18 micron Athlon to be pushed up to 2GHz. If Intel can maintain this huge clock speed they've got two major advantages.
1) Their parts perform about as well as a much lower clocked Athlon for most tasks. However, give it something really regular like 3D, and it totally blows the Athlon away. Intel has gotten wise to the fact that nobody really uses consumer chips for anything other than 3D. Even the most bloated of Office apps don't demand much more than a 500MHz chip. However, get into anything 3D or media related (stuff that is pretty regular, but very compute intensive) then procs 1GHz+ are required. By performing about the same for most tasks, and totally blowing Athlon away in media, Intel hopes to get back their market share. This also explains why Intel is targetting this chip only at consumers (no SMP, the rumblings about using SDRAM) because the chip really wouldn't be ideal in a server situation.
B) Intel has the clock-speed advantage in terms of marketing. Like it or not, a huge number of people by their CPU for the clock-speed. In the market, a 1.4GHz Athlon vs. a 2GHz P4 at the same price will be a no-brainer for most people.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Since the P4 has a pipeline that is twice as long as the P3 the actual performance boost will be MUCH lower than you may think. Every time the compiler guessed wrong on the runtime data you just wased 20 CPU cycles...
I would guess that it would be on par with a just-over-1GHz Athlon. After all, to be on the safe side they did compare with an 800 MHz P3...
The NVIDIA Vanta chips are probably best here. You can get a 8MB version for about $40 on pricewatch, or a 16MB version for about $50. Around $55-60 you can get a Matrox G200.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I find it quite ironic to show a 2Ghz CPU when you can't even supply our 1Ghz. Has anyone seen a 1Ghz CPU from Intel somewhere lately? They seem to have all vanished from the price lists.
2Ghz is just hype, one more attempt to show people they are ahead in the clock speed race which nobody still follows except them.
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear"
I think it's going to be great despite the AMD-owned naysayers' predictions. Really, I don't know why people go against Intel, and constantly bash them, yet continue to use IBM-compatible systems. After all, AMD, Cyrix, Winchip, etc... are all INTEL COMPATIBLE, not IBM compatible. Intel makes the x86 chipset (x being a variable, not part of a trademark, "x86" from Cyrix.)
When was the last time you saw a program that would only run on an AMD chipset? I actually have a few that only do Intel. (Yeah, it's weird, but so are the programs.)
I think that while the 1GHz P3 was just showing off, 2GHz P4s are likely... just not for at least a year, so they have time to debug them.
(*Shudders remembering the 200MHz 6x86 Cyrix chip that slowly burned out while doing disk maintenance, arrrgh.)
Well you have to admit that it is impressive that the brand new next generation 2GHz processor can outperform the third slowest 850 MHz processor of the previous generation! I'm going to start saving now and shell out as much as I need to so I can buy the fastest processor in the world! ($1 invested at current interest rates should become enough by the time this gets to market) Of course, a month or so later AMD will release a new chip that has the same clock speed and better preformance. (again)
credo quia absurdum
*If Lightning Strikes
Education is the silver bullet.
Somewhere in 2002...when they don't need a nuclear power plant and a freezer to keep the thing running.
As with most of the recent Intel announcements, surely the most important question is "when are speeds like this going to be available in quantity?"
Without a decent answer to that, all of these announcements look more like an attempt to create FUD to work against AMD than like genuine advancements in the field.
Because I think a 2Ghz is what I'll be finally able to buy, at a premium, in 2002-2003 somewhere, the way Intel keeps relasing and never deliver in volume until loooooooooooong after.,,
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Why do things like this even get posted to /. This article is just filled with inflated marketing hype.
... peer-to-peer networking
The 1GHz Xeon chip offers 256KB of Level 2 cache and a 133MHz bus, he said.
Wow so it's got twice the cache, a little over twice the clockspeed and a slighly higher bus speed than my OC'd celeron300 that I bought for pennies over a year ago.
The future is
Obligatory napster reference (dont flame me I do know what they really mean)
A 1.5GHz Pentium 4 system was then tested against an 800MHz Pentium III system in video capture. The 1.5GHz Pentium 4 was able to capture more frames of video than the 800MHz Pentium III
Wow good test. Curious how they dont mention any figures or how the difference in bus speed might affect the video capture performance. I HIGHLY doubt that the 1.5ghz machine was over twice as fast.
"Pentium 4 will be the fastest desktop processor in the world"
When it ships maybe, but when it actually hits the streets AMD should already be there. Intel seems to ship things an awful long time before you can actually buy them. They need faster ships
It all comes down to porn my friend... With a chip like this you could view pornographic images of the russian dwarf tossing team jumping into the sack with Anti-Porns mom a sack of flower in hand, two cans of easy cheese and a whole shit ton of those little rubber duckies you had as a kid, the kind that would float around in your bath tub and you'd try to drown them thinking "eheheh die you little basatrd" but they wouldn't stay down no matter what you did to them..... ummmm what was my point..... oh yeah porn you can view porn alot quicker with something like that and we all know that faster porn is a really cool thing. .
I figured it out once but it didnt seem important so i left it alone.
Well, when I read an article on Willamette at Ars Technica site, I had impression that Intel is hasty because AMD follows very closely or even AMD surpassed the Intel. This and next year were intended to be 1.3~ 1.5 GHz chips as far as I know. But with that speed range, Intel doesn't seem to maintain its leadership. Wouldn't the 2GHz chip for that situation?
Well.. Apple, Apple... although Mhz doesn't say it all, Apple's 500 or more speed G4 chip can't beat 1GHz or more Pentium chip. What are they doing with PowerPC chips? As far as I know many PowerPC engineers at Motorola were hired by AMD.
If so, shouldn't Apple use AMD chip for their future? Why stick with the G4 chip?
what's next - a million 486's dancing on the head of a pin?
To see how the new chip perform we will have to wait for neutral benchmarks. Perhaps it will not beat the Athlon clock by clock, but it will start with 1.5 GHz und will scale well beyond 2 Ghz this will make it the performance leader for some time.
So I take it that you've already seen the neutral benchmarks and already know that it is the performance leader?
"...beyond 2 Ghz this will make it the performance leader for some time. "
An "in the shops" AlphaServer will out SpecFP an "in your dreams" 2GHz Intel P4. What definition of "leader" are you using?
FatPhil
(Proud Alpha owner)
Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
Please... why arent you still using a Pentium 90 if that is really the way you feel. What makes it worse is that everytime AMD comes out with a new processor everyone goes woohoo and talks about how great it is, when Intel does its "why do we need this". The truth is that there are always applications that can use as much processor as you can through at them. Would you rather have a cluster of 386s or P4 2GHz's to do the weather problem?
Not to imply Intel had rigged this one, but a single demo of a single P4@2GHz doesn't mean we'll that chip at that speed for sale any time soon.
One easy way in which Intel could have boosted performance numbers: Fab a P4 at 0.13 microns.
0.13 micron fabbing in quantity won't be around for a while, but IBM will, for a price, give you small runs on their X-ray lithography rig at 0.12 and below (as of years ago; it may be even finer now).
Intel may also have an experimental 0.13 fab line for fine-tuning processes before launch. 0.13 should be available in quantity around Christmas or so if I'm getting Moore's law right.
With either of these approaches, Intel would have to do custom tweaking of design parameters for the target process, but it might be worth the effort if it provides a 2 GHz demo chip.
Or, their uber-pipelined chip really _may_ run that fast in an aggressive cooling rig. See elsewhere for the short/long pipeline debate.
For a more pessimistic view, check out this journal paper.
--
... in having a processor so fast that its power requirements are such that it dims the picture on your monitor. Whats the point in having a high framerate in quake if you keep bumping into the
walls?
"Presenting the new 2000Mhz Pentium",
Lights go up.
"And now a demo", presses powerbutton,
Lights go down.
Bob.
Of course it was a handpicked chip! It was a P4 sample you moron. What, you think they were going to randomly pull a chip off the line and bring it to the forum untested? The fact that it *can* be overclocked by 25% to run at 2GHz at room temperature they said is pretty amazing if you ask me. Yeah, it was a friggin demo. Yeah, the article wasn't all that specific. It was a msnbc article not a journal article. What exactly do you want? For all you lameass non-powerusers out there: Ok, maybe you don't need a 2GHz chip to run Netscape, Notepad and Acroread. But I'm sure you frugal jerkoffs can appreciate a cheaper 500MHz celeron so you can edit text faster. If you didn't realize it, the competition in the high performance has an astonishing effect on the low performance market. The mere existence of the 1.4GHz P4 will seriously reduce the price of the sub 1GHZ P3 boards. Unfortunately in this case, your ignorance is not bliss.
{Intel announcement template}
Today DD/MM/YY (date of last announcement plus one month) we announce the introduction of the Pentium X(increment the last number by one)that runs at XXXXGhz(increase Ghz 15%). This processor is the most advanced one that exists! It be available to the general public at an affordable cost in 36 to 48 months (maybe). At that time we will have released the Pentium XX that runs at XXThz (terra), which will be the most advanced processor ever built.
{/announcement}
Technology is only a vehicle. People are the ones that drive it.
Not to imply Intel had rigged this one, but a single demo of a single P4@2GHz doesn't mean we'll that chip at that speed for sale any time soon.
The 2GHz part was a handpicked chip, cooled like hell, and is far from being available.
The 850 mW number is measured "the Intel way", and therefore some considerable spindoctoring is involved.
Of course one can buy into the Intel marketing, but I prefer to spare my enthusiasm until I see that stuff for real, in volume, and tested by independent and reliable publications.
they are going to sell this machines to run
word 2002 in windowze 2002 ?.
Probably you will need 100 giga for the instalation files.
I still miss my wp5.1, at least latex exist....
OverLord (depressed)
AMD was first with the 1GHz processor. Intel retaliates with a 2GHz. I'm betting that AMD will announce a 3GHz next week.
Expect world temperature to sharply increase by next year.
Steal all the trolls material ahead of time so they can't say anything that they would construe as clever.
Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of these things?
But how fast can it render Natalie Portman nude and petrified?
NOT the 15t p05t!
====
Crudely Drawn Games
Anyone else think that this might be because the Itanium chip is unstable? They obviously wouldn't want their system to keep crashing (unlike Micro$oft), so they build a cluster that will keep going even if a chip or two burns up.
Just my theory...
SUWAIN: Slashdot User Without An Interesting Name
SUWAIN: Slashdot User Without An Interesting Name
Looking only at IPC is just as misleading as looking at MHz alone. The only performance indicator that really matters is execution time for your apps. I don't really care what the IPC or the MHz of ProcessorX is as long is it gives me good performance for my applications. I think Intel simply decided to make a trade off here: use a lower IPC than P!!!, but have a high enough clock rate to more than make up for it. I don't know if they will succeed, but I think that is what they are aiming for, anyway...
Actually, I wouldn't mind this. While a million 486's may not be as efficient as a single chip, a million 486 chips is still _really_ powerful. But my point is this: redundancy. With a million 486 chips, you can lose 999,999 chips and still be running (albeit very slowly).
But, if they're on one die, it might not have the redundancy benefit. (I'm not chip expert.)
SUWAIN: Slashdot User Without An Interesting Name
SUWAIN: Slashdot User Without An Interesting Name
Yes, you're right I should have looked more closely at the specs.
I've been hearing things about the P4 for some time now, the 20 stage pipeline being one of them. I wasn't aware that they were doing significant things to compensate for the problems such a long pipleine introduces.
The other thing I heard is that its floating point performance is really bad. Now it may run some new style SSE2 floating point instructions at a decent clip, but how is that not a mere attempt at locking developers into using only those (patented I'm sure) instructions? Carrot and stick.
Not that I'm an intel hater. If intel makes the better chip then that is the chip I'm going to buy. Same goes for AMD or any other vendor. But based on their corporate culture and behaviour, I wouldn't be suprised if this chip is either a dog, or broken in some way designed to "lock in" users or developers. It wouldn't be the first time.
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
What I do take issue with is this 850mW figure for a 500MHz PIII. Intel's low power consumption tricks up till now have involved idling the processor when there isn't much happening, and I strongly suspect that this 850mW figure has a lot of idling in its measurement time frame. That figure of 5.5W max looks far more likely to really reflect the power consumption of the low power PIII. Um... duh? I believe it was clearly spoken that the 850mW figure was taken during a typical office application. I don't remember the numbers offhand, but something like a computer uses as little as 10% of its resources during a typical office application since it can take a quick nap between virtually every one of the user's keystrokes. It should then not be surprising that they can get the power figure to less than a watt during typical office applications. but I do wish that Intel would be more 'honest' with its figures. The fact that they included peak power consumption seems to me to be more honest than, say, Transmeta has been in their marketing strategies. I was at the EPF where Transmeta had a large amount of presence. Their power measurements were all made during these "sleepy" office applications, and they always compared against the P3's peak power consumption, with no power saving features on. And you think Intel's been misleading you?
but I do wish that Intel would be more 'honest' with its figures.
I agree, but remember: they have to compete with the Transmeta spindoctors, who play the same game. Transmeta did quite a bit of damage to the traditional method of determining power requirements. Intel is using some of their tricks against them. AMD is starting to get the hint, but their K7 parts are way too hot to even consider jumping into this arena, which is why they still push low power K6-2.
Again, once we can put side-by-side Intel, Transmeta and AMD portables and compare them on a large variety of benchmarks (both power, performance and battery life), we'll have to wade through all of this marketing crap coming from all sides.
---
Unto the land of the dead shalt thou be sent at last.
Surely thou shalt repent of thy cunning.
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
The big news may have been lost here. Much fewer people will take advantage of 2 GHz than a mobile 500 MHz processor that consumes so little power.
I'm looking forward to (and lots of other folks too) the availability of a mobile processor that doesn't generate so much heat and extends memory life. Don't hold your breath for the Transmeta chip just yet, the products just aren't there yet.
Dave
Let's face it, is there really much point in Intel demo'ing this shit when:
1. They're demoing it now. This means the official release date will probably be at the end of the year and you might actually be able to buy one sometime next year. Of course, even then you'll have to wait a while 'cos Intel can't produce anything near the required quantities.
2. What good is all that extra CPU power really going to do you? Compile a Linux kernel in a couple of minutes? Big deal.
What we really need is an end to these ridiculous memory wars and a serious drop in memory prices.
Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
While this chip will run a 2Ghz, just how many instructions is it executing during each of those clock cycles?
With a 20 stage pipeline... not as many as a P3 or Athlon.
Intel designed this chip for very high clock rates with the assumption that Mhz ratings sell chips and systems because joe public is too stupid to know what IPC means. Sadly they may be right. Long gone are the days when the average computer shopper even knew how to use his or her system, let alone what went on under the hood.
Also, have you heard about how abysmal the floating point performance on it is supposed to be?
Hello Cyrix!
Lee
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
The internal core is faster
The Bus is the same
The Ram is Rambus
The HD is still not really faster
The chip is STILL 32 bit. (Even my game console does better)
The intel pentium chip is a 78 firebird that is falling apart
Damn Pentium chips.. but we keep buying the stupid things. I don't think they are ever going to get the message that the current CISC/32bit archetecture is old and dead. *sigh*
--------------------