Slashdot Mirror
New Pentium 5 Details - 5-7ghz?
zymano writes "This article gives some details on Pentium 5. It will have 64 bit extensions and maybe a 4000 mhz frontside bus. Quote from the article,'The Pentium V is likely to fly along at between 5GHz to 7GHz, have 2MB plus of level two cache, be built on a 90 nanometer process, and have a stackable design. '"
.. That article sounds a bit too good to be true, I'd like to see their sources. Some of those figures seem to be plucked from thin air. ...
..
They would need some serious cooling going on at those speeds
Anyhow Imagine a Beowulf Cluster of these
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
Stackable designs sound really cool in the sense that you can cut latency between processors (for things like cache coherence) to rediculously small levels, but what about cooling? Cooling ability is roughly proportional to surface area, and two stacked chips will make twice as much heat but have almost the same surface area as only one (as two sides cancel out). This has to be a problem.
No this is not a troll. I honestly wonder how they expect to accomplish this.
Anyone know?
Cheers,
Justin
The article doesn't say the processor will have 64-bit extensions. The article doesn't say anything.
Some quotes:
"The Pentium V is likely..."
"The processor we believe..."
"The final design of this arrangement is not set in stone."
"...details have not been confirmed,..."
"... the source claimed..."
"The Pentium V could have..."
"...although this may be reserved for the next chip along, the Nehalem"
This isn't news, this is BS speculation.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
There's no point in raising the speed of the processor to 5GHz if the memory speed (esp. latency) can't keep pace.
4GHz front-side bus? Yeah, right.
Face it - the only way we'll see the end of x86 is if someone builds a new, non-x86 chip that can still run all that existing x86 code at least as well as the best existing x86 processors. Otherwise it's just another niche architecture, and no-one's going to "upgrade" to it.
Intel forgot that, or thought they could force it on people anyway. AMD remembered, but took the easy way out & just extended things. Similarly, IBM got it wrong with OS/2, and MS jumped straight in with Windows. Note how long it took before MS was able to phase out DOS completely, even so.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
Speaking of redundant...how many people have posted saying Pentium 5 is redundant?
There ain't no rules here; we're trying to accomplish something.
heheh, details indeed!
only thing certain is that it is just marketing at this point.
on a sidenote.. no fucking way for a modular system(add in 64bit shit ala math co-processor), not anymore. there's just no point in selling so expensive ships for consumer use that there would be much point in such. and also it does sound like it would be quite awful design too that way(being '64bit' extensions which could be just about anything!)..
also the timing schedule mentioned somewhere seems a LITTLE optimistic... actually all 'details' about it seem like all the far fetched possibilities stacked together!(stackable design& etc.. i wonder if they got some wonders up their sleeves to cool the thing too..)
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
...likely to fly along at between 5GHz to 7GHz...
...and Windows 2005 (Code named Canyonero) will still manage to slow it to a crawl!
.
You're using her as bait, Master!
If you look at media benchmarks, encoding requires a lot of processing power. So, while ripping your DVD may not take any more time on your P3-1GHz versus your P4-2.4GHz, converting it to DivX MPEG-4 for your media jukebox will take significantly longer on the P3 than the P4. In fact, decoding H.264 video and WMP9 High Definition supposedly requires 3GHz (or the equivalent in AMD doublespeak) processors. Add to that the fact that you may want to do more than one thing at once (i.e. encode video in the background and play back another), and you will quickly run into a hard wall. Check out this link for a very nice roundup of how older processors fare against newer processors. A simple DV-to-MPEG2 conversion takes approximately twice as long on a P3-1GHz than it does on a P4-2.4GHz. That's a lot of time when you have a couple of hours of video to encode. Audio and image manipulation applications, video editing and the like will also benefit in similar ways.
Games, it goes without saying, scale in a similar way and a similar doubling of performance.
The caveat: for many business applications, you will hardly notice a difference. A faster I/O subsystem and more RAM, as you mention, will pay much larger dividends for these users than any processor upgrade will. In fact, this post is being written up on my trusty P2-400MHz all-SCSI box and it's still going strong, though it's getting a bit long in the tooth.
5-7ghz and yet i still find no scenario to replace my pIII .5ghz. other than games but i dont game that much anyhoo
For The Best Jazz/Hip-hop fusion > COlD DUCK
We all know that Intel is going to come out with something faster and better than the current P4. But what matters is what is shipping, not rumors companies place with tech column writers in order to scare people away from their competitors. Apple made a lot of noise about the G5, which ended up basically just keeping up with the x86 world in terms of speed, and Intel made a lot of noise about the P4 and that was a disappointment, too. When the P5 ships and how well it will perform remains to be seen.
Umm.. My first PC had 640kb of RAM, which wasn't that bad -86. Now one could copy it 200 times in the cache of the P5.. I wonder, are we 200 times happier now? :)
Reading these amazing specs, with the attendant oohs and aahs and lots of ifs thrown in --"it seems, it could be" -- this gives me the feeling that it might just be vapourware, brought out at this time in the time honoured tradition of microsoft announcing products that do not even exist beyond specification form simply for the reason of cornering the market. AMD's Opteron and IBM's PPC 970 (G5 in Apple's Macs) are getting more press than the desasterous Itanium or even the Itanium2 for that matter.
My feeling is that while Intel is probably less worried about the G5/PPC 970 as their marketshare is very small, but is more worried about the effect a successful Opteron could have on the market, on the one hand not needing special recoding for 64 bit apps (compatible to x86 32bit) and more importantly what the Opterons could do to the server market, causing companies to switch their 32 bit Xeon stuff to 64 bit Opteron with little effort and low price.
I seriously doubt that all of a sudden next year, CPUs will be on the market running at 5 to 7 GHz without having serious cooling problems or running away from memory.
So, in summary, I think it's Intel's marketing department in microsoft mode:Vapourware.