Slashdot Mirror
Intel Quietly Introduces 3.8GHz P4
BatonRogue writes "I didn't see this anywhere else, but it looks like Intel has quietly launched their Pentium 4 570J running at 3.8GHz. The J denotes Intel's Execute Disable Bit support, which they have also quietly introduced (it seems to save face of being 2nd to support it behind AMD). AnandTech seems to be the only place to have a review of the 570J. It performs reasonably well and even better than AMD in some areas, while falling behind in things like games. AnandTech has a nice one page benchmark comparison of the 570J to AMD's 4000+ as a quick reference."
I can't help but be amused at the way Intel have had to "sneak" the fastest model of their Flagship processor out of the door.
Does anybody remember a few years ago, the Athlon was outperforming anything Intel had to offer, yet they still claimed it was only competing with the Celeron.
Can someone justify that they compared Intel's 3.8 Ghz to AMD 4000+ (4 Ghz equivalent, theorically)? Maybe they wanted to compare both company highest speed CPU... anyway, the only positive side I see in these high speed CPU is that they'll drive prices of their (somewhat) slower counterpart down... the AMD 3500+ is already at a very interesting price/performance ratio, it can only get better... and HL2 is only days away!
Eureka Science News - automatically updated
while falling behind in things like games.
Perhaps that's why it was quietly introduced? Gaming is really the only reason for a CPU upgrade these days. Knowing that AMD would achieve another victory in that area, why would they spend money promoting yet another little bump to the P4's clock speed? My guess is that they're waiting for the real kicker; this is just something to keep their heads above the water until it's ready.
Perhaps since AMD said it would compare to a 4GHz processor.
Since Intel stopped just putting out processors based on clockspeed and started focusing on the rest of the processor, hence the name change.
http://shit.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/14/1 813223
I once attended a lecture by one of the designers from AMD. He said, that the clock speed of the processor was a key selling point. In reality, all the development that went into making processors operate at a higher clock cycle could be spent in much better ways, making better and more efficient processors. But - alas - efficiency doesn't sell. High numbers on a package does.
Anyway, does any of you actually have a specific need for high frequency processors? Most of the projects I've been working on always had other bottle necks, preventing me from utilizing the CPU completly.
Underholdning.info
3.8 != 4
sorry bud
Intel's plans for a quiet introduction goes down the drain.
However the full review is a good 14 pages of ad cluttered pages. I see they're taking the Tom's Hardware approach to generating ad dollars.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
for a grad student at work (i work IT for the engineering college) and the grad student insisted on intel. I warned him that intels run hotter and louder (because they need more cooling) but he said intel anyways. Well once i delivered the machine to him, the first thing he said was "wow that thing is loud". I used a boxed intel cpu (which comes with the heatsink and fan) and when you put it under load, you can hear it clear across the room. Intel's heat problem is just ridiciously, and i am afraid to even hear what a 3.8 ghz would sound like when you ran it full steam.
Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
Look at the power consumption difference between this new P4 and the Athlon 64. It's big enough between the 90nm P4's and 130nm A64's, but a 90nm P4 system uses nearly twice the juice of a 90nm A64. Mind you, that's the difference between entire systems, so the consumption difference between just the CPUs is even more extreme.
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these...
For a moment there I read "Executive Disable" bit. I'd have bought that gadget in a minute!
Cool. This should make my Word 97 fly.
A 3.8ghz P4 chip out in time for people who need an extra computer and an extra space heater.
"Some fight for law. Some fight for justice. What will you fight for? One day, you will see."
Anyways, I must go and purchase this new geek toy, its like $500 for 0.2Ghz I can show off to all of my friends!!!!!!!
Friends? Oh, you mean Mom and the guy you are told is your Dad.
In fact, the only thing anyone noticed was the rise in ambient air temperature.
95% of software in China is pirated. The figure also applies to patented technology.
I blame Intel for global warming
Cyrix was bought from National Semiconductor by Via.
Google on: Cyrix history
I find that my 2.0 Ghz can hardly heat the room as quickly as I'd like it to. Maybe if I get the new Intel 3.6 Ghz, I could also have the added benefit of toasting marshmallows on it.
A blog like any other.
Oh, wait... that's right... /me grins evilly.
I guess one of those processors cannot do that.
Viva AMD!
I would like to see more benchmarking of software compiled and optimized for each processor. While it is useful to compare how CPUs execute identical code, that doesn't tell the whole story.
The main problem is that precompiled binaries may have been optimized for one processor or another, introducing bias into the study. I'm not saying we should get rid of this kind of benchmarking, but to see the big picture, we also need results from programs compiled from source and optimized for each processor.
For those who don't know what this is (I didn't), Intel's writeup on it is here. It doesn't look completely evil, but then it is their own marketing docs. Anandtech's writeup is similarly positive, more or less.
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?
Why would they quietly release this? Usually, even if it is a crappy product, they make a big deal about it.
Maybe its a clever marketing ploy
However the full review is a good 14 pages of ad cluttered pages.
Here's the single-page version. I'm running AdBlock, so I don't know if it has any ads.
Transmeta's chip supports nx.
"Full steam", I mean. It's a good description of what could happen when this Intel processor is run at full load.
That this thing has an XD bit.
shit is so old school. i prefer http://fuck.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/14/1 813223
Joseph?
What I can't wait for is the first time AMD makes a processor that benches slower than it's actual clock speed in comparison to some Intel part. Will they suck it up and call the 4500 MHz part a 4200+, or is it all marketing bullshit through and through?
"What's the frequency Kenneth?"
It's interesting to note that the idle power consumption is actually lower that a 3.0 Ghz P4 530. Could this be an indication that Intel are trying to rectify the problems with the 90nm process?
The benchmark referenced in this article gives Intel a big break by not comparing the Athlon 64 in native 64 bit mode. The few articles that do typically don't come right out and show the graphs side by side with Intel. 64 bit support makes a big difference in an increasing number of applications.
Another important fact - a socket 939 based motherboard purchased today should accept a dual core Athlon 64 in about a year. The dual channel memory controller in the 939 version means there will be plenty of memory bandwidth for that upgrade.
Encoding and transcoding video and audio are two great examples of CPU intensive work that aren't "games".
I run natively compiled Gentoo on my Athlon 64 system.
...successfully introduces the first integrated I/O chipset which can sync up all critical peripherals to be on the same bus speed. Video cards and CPUs far exceed any processing capacities provided by memory or storage components. While there still may not be the "killer app" to justify all that extra power, it will allow the respective company to temporarily get a hearty headstart in the dick-waving contest.
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
intel seems to always win when being benchmarked on micro$oft products such as, office as you can see in the benchmarking marking results hmmmmmm............
Minor correction to the initial post -- Intel is 3rd to add this feature, Transmeta was 2nd.
``Intel's Execute Disable Bit support, which they have also quietly introduced (it seems to save face of being 2nd to support it behind AMD)''
IIRC, VIA and Transmeta already support this. And, of course, all Real CPUs have supported it for years.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
That Intel has already announced that it is stepping away from the "Bigger Clock Speeds mean Better Processors" theory. The release of a higher clock speed processor seems to fly right in the face of that announcement. This is probably one of the last releases in that department they are going to make. I know that a 4 GHz will not be manufactured by Intel. As a matter of fact, you can search for the article here on Slashdot to find that they are lowering clockspeeds, and going for more efficient CPU's.
Help me, help you. - Jerry McGuire
If the P4 is really gonna top out at 3.8 and considering that Intel has said that they will not release consumer level dual-core chips until 2006, what the hell are they gonna do for all of 2005? Im guessing marketing large cache chips, but I really have no idea. Intel really painted themselved in a corner this time. If they could swollow their pride they should really just release a mainstream version of the Pentium M.
Smoking is an expensive, slow, and unreliable method of suicide.
NX/EDB should be the default mode for memory accessed by logic: unexecutable data. Computer science, engineering and other programming has shown that practically all memory is used for either data or instructions; only rarely do "metaprogramming" patterns call for processing the instructions as data. However, all memory space is typically treated equally, though some memory protection is instituted in VMs, like separate address spaces per process. A much better memory model for CPUs is an execution mask, which privileged processes can update to allocate instruction space for started child processes. Modern OS'es not only use VM (virtual memory) and MMU APIs, they usually have hardware support (MMU chips) for managing memory. Mapping the MMU index to a dedicated fraction of main memory (eg. 1b:KB = 1MB:8GB, or even a scaling factor configured dynamically) would let instruction vectors execute very quickly, probably adding negligible overhead to instruction execution as each memory access passes through an extra "NAND". Extra CPU/MMU cache dedicated to the execution mask is better spent on such a qualitatively beneficial feature than on just extra KB of instruction to hit. And the benefits in uptime alone make the performance proposition a win, running marathons compared to lots of sprints ending in halts and restarts. That reliability bubbles up in efficiency throughout the cycle, from running programs, to developing them, debugging them, maintaining them, managing them, and buying them - the human teams become much more efficient when the tools are always sharp with steady handles. And chip vendors would have another feature on which to compete, rather than just the pernicious price and MHz games. Intel, are you listening?
--
make install -not war
Can someone explain why having this is such a good idea? I can imagine that putting executable code in by using a buffer overflow is a bad thing. But you would still be able to change the parameters of the program and/or destroy data from the program. So though it might prevent some worms from spreading, I don't see the big difference. With a bit of engeneering, you might alter the application enough to get to the same results anyway.
What the question boild down to is: how much more secure would this make the average program or operating system?
It performs reasonably well and even better than AMD in some areas, while falling behind in things like games.
What are these "some areas," you speak of? Surely you're not implying that a CPU is useful for things other than gaming?
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
yeah you're right. The AMD processor is much better than the Intel equivalent, I mean it's equivalent to a whole 200 megahertz higher than the Intel processor.
Of _course_ they added NX to x86 after AMD - AMD were the ones who launched it!
Oh wait, unless you're talking about no-execute page bits on CPUs in general. In which case Intel were first, with Itanium 1.
Its actually quite good. I used it for some time. Its not at the point where it is better than a keyboard and mouse, but it will check your email on command when you come home from work and are still standing at the door. The rest of the speech is quite impressive as well.
And it tells knock knock jokes. They're so bad,they're funny.
Me: Computer (default name), Tell me a joke
Computer: Knock Knock
Me: Computer, whose there?
Computer: Orange.
Me: Computer, Orange who?
Computer: Orange you glad you bought a computer that will talk to you?