Slashdot Mirror
Intel Prescott Released
daemonslayer writes "The nondisclosure agreement on Intel's long awaited new Pentium 4, codenamed Prescott, has just been lifted. So can it beat its predecessor, the Northwood? Find out at Anandtech, Tom's Hardware, or any of the other thousand review sites." Or HotHardware, PC Magazine, XBitLabs, or HardOCP. Basically, looks like it's faster, but still not the fastest in all areas. Tide goes in, tide goes out.
The most interesting characteristic of these new P4's is IMHO:"
"On the other hand, Prescott is looking at some massive increases in latency, the access latency for the Level 1 cache has quadrupled, and the Level 2 cache accesses are approximately 50% slower." -- Lost Circuits
Intel better ramp up that clock and/or have everyone optimizing for SSE3 if they want to dominate the benchmarks.
Suggested mod-limit: 3, Interesting
Belief is the currency of delusion.
Can I overclock it to 5 HGz ?
Prescott will be like the P4. It will be slow in the begining as they milk every mhz stepping they can but will slow start to shine when they pump up the MHZ.
Its a shame but that is how it goes and went with the P4 it need more speed to be able to show it true worth.
It would be nice if they said screw it and just released it a 4.0
You have to ask the question!
With the Athlon 64, IA64 and G5 vying for the 64bit market, and Athlon offering native supports of 32-bit binaries. Why would anyone want a new series of Pentium 4E?
Is Intel feeling that Athlon may be about to make leaps and bounds in the small business/desktop market?
Has anyone done a test of the AMD64 running a 64 bit OS vs P4 running a 32 bit OS? Say Linux. To see the difference when they full power of the chip is taken advantage of. Especially with rendering. It may be a little like comparing Apples and Oranges but comparing these 2 chips can be that way. And to throw in a 32 bit OS on the AMD64 chip isn't really fair to it's power. It's not really using the full potential of the chip.
Evolution or ID?
Prescott is the assistant to the navigator in Moby Dick, and he is known for being excellent at making rapid computations.
It seems that both AMD/Intel are trying to double everything in a single CPU, such as L1, L2, even DDR to DDRII :). I just wonder why they have lack product lines of dual-CPU systems for main consumers? Their SMP solutions are either very high-end not going to face main consumers, or fading to the market because of slow enough (both of them always have unresonable prices).
For most people, the most areas Pentium4/Althon XP take advantages are 3D applications, data servers, and some scitisfic applications. However, a SMP system with two main stream processors also can achieve the simpilar(just slower a little bit) scores. Those applications always can be implemented through parallel approaches. (I believe it already have done this during the designing time....).
For example, for SMP solutions, I have to choose between Operton and Althon MP, but in actually I want a dual-althonXP with the double prices. I think that such system is what many other people really want to buy insteading of investing massive money on new processor/cooling system for better performance.... I believe there is not a big technical matter for this just trying to force us follow their single processor upgrading ways....
"Why spend billions, when you can spend millions?"
The way it works is that an XP2600+ is 2.6 times faster than a 1GHz Duron,
a 3000+ is 3 times faster than a 1GHz Duron, etc.
This is according to "PC Hardware in a Nutshell" 3rd edition (O'Reilly).
Can anyone back this up with a reference from AMD?
*sigh* back to work...
Does anyone here remember the early Pentium 4 1.4 and 1.7 GHz chips built on the Socket 423 form factor? With only 256 KB of on-die L2 cache and few programs (at that time) that could take full advantage of the Pentium 4's SSE2 multimedia extensions, small wonder why the CPU was much-disliked originally. It wasn't until Intel came out with the newer Pentium 4's with the 512 KB L2 cache and software that fully took advantage of SSE2 extensions that the CPU finally took off in popularity.
I don't see the Prescott-core CPU's become popular until software catches up with supporting all the functions of the CPU; we may see that with Windows XP Service Pack 2 and later builds of the Linux 2.6.x kernel.