Slashdot Mirror
Pentium 4 6XX Sequence and New EE P4s Launched
Mojo-Dog writes "Today Intel took the wraps off their new
Pentium 4 Processors with EM64T extensions for 64-bit computing. The
Pentium 4 6XX Sequence and Pentium 4 3.73GHz are based on Prescott 2M cores with
a full 2MB of on-chip L2 cache as well.
HotHardware.com has a full review with benchmarks posted of these new P4s,
many of which also offer Intel's SpeedStep technology for power savings and
improved thermals, which has been available in Pentium Mobile CPUs for some time
now."
"It's no secret that Intel has occassionally been playing a bit of catchup this year in the desktop and workstation processor arena"
No kidding. Nintendo had a 64 bit processor back in like, '96.
Don't you mean.. BIZZARO!
"older" P4 will have a price drop,which will be good for People saving 50$ on a new System.
and just in time for Windows XP 64-bit!
how lucky!
And how much did intel pay for this story on slashdot . It reads like a marketing blurb
I think you misunderstand the way stories work on Slashdot. The first one is free. Intel has to pay for the duplicate story six hours from now.
I certify that I, anonymous coward, have reviewed this article in comparison to other recent articles and have found it to NOT be a dupe.
This certification provided 'as is', all guarantees and warrantees are disclaimed.
This has been a public service posting.
Shouldn't they of released their space heaters at the *beginning* of Winter?
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
The Tech Report also has an excellent writeup 4 -600/index.x?pg=1>
Wow, nicely said. Is this close enough to make binaries interchangable or are they two separate platforms? Either way I am 100% sure that things are exactly as they are.
Runs hot, still going to be a cooling nightmare... And we all knew intel was putting a 2mb on die cache to speed up the proc. The only mysteries are why the 64 but extensions which look to prove pretty worthless in the long run, have been added (lic from AMD). And what took Intell so long to put the speed step tech on the desktop p4's? I mean come on it is a great way to cool those p4 heat pigs, people have been screaming for it for about a year, kinda a no brainer.. gg Intel still catchup. Not being a fan boy or anything but I will still save my money and get the AMD chips, and deal with slower excel benchmarks, since that extra 4 seconds I waste every few hours will really add up.
---In a time of Chimpanzees I was a Monkey.
... of this new CPU is how little power it uses compared to older Prescotts:
. htm
- 600/index.x?pg=16
http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-263-11
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2005q1/pentium4
Load temperatures are the same levels as idle temps on the old prescotts!
Quick summary for gamers:
This P4 still lags behind the Athlon FX-55 and 64 4000+ for Doom3, HL2, UT2004, and the general 3dMark benchmark. Pricewatch has the FX-55 at 900$ US and the 64 4000 at 620$, which is cheaper than the best chip of the bunch at 999$. Granted, video cards are probably the biggest system decision for gamers, but if CPUs figure into your decision, you might want to consider the comparisons.
That's Shouldn't they have, not " Shouldn't they of".
Cheers,
CD
Use ISO 8601 dates [YYYY-MM-DD]
or enconding an MP3?
Why do you want to know?
Sincereley,
Your Friendly Neighborhood RIAA Agent
Error 407 - No creative sig found
I have been trying to find out what the performance of the AMD and Intel chips is really like with 64 bit apps on a 64 bit OS and have yet to find anything that covers it. This article as usual goes on about 32 bit apps on a 64 bit OS which really doesn't help. I want to know if the Intel implementation is as efficient as AMDs and this would be easy enough with Linux but none of these reviews ever consider running on Linux. Just saying that 64 bit support isn't an issue at the moment doesn't cut it, I want to know now!
"I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
Get out and get a LIFE, man! Slashdot isn't so important! Sheesh, with the number of posting I see by you, it's obvious you haven't left your computer in years.
MIPS R12000 system that's sitting on my desk has 8MB of L2 cache. And yes, it's circa 2000.
IRC: Grounded0 @ IRCnet. "I was lucky get into computers when it was very young & idealistic industry" -Steve Jobs
Basically they're just IA-32 architecture without it's most worst design errors.
1. 8 registers increased to 16 (it still sucks compared to SPARC's 128).
2. Larger addressing width (eg. can allocate more than 4GB of memory limited by 32-bit architectures). Alpha and MIPS had this capability in 1992.
3. NX bit (can prevent buffer overflows). Has been available for ages on good CPU architectures.
IRC: Grounded0 @ IRCnet. "I was lucky get into computers when it was very young & idealistic industry" -Steve Jobs
Normally I don't pay much attention to these reviews, but damn this review smacked of Intel fanboyism and anti-AMD'ism. In summary, the comments fell into two catagories:
1. If Intel beat the AMD in a test
"Once again it's game over for AMD"
2. If AMD beats Intel in a test
"AMD struggles to keep ahead of Intel in this test"
I thought at first it was just a one off comment - but the almost all of the evaluations were like that.
Obviously we each tend to have a preference for one brand over another but please can we have consistent commenting.
Paul.
Sure, AMD invented those extensions, but Intel has 80% of the desktop processor market (amd only stole them a 2% in the last 6 months). This should mean that soon most of the desktop processors with 64 bit extensions will the ones from intel, not the ones from amd.
wow... the name really does reflect the stuff they cover
Item 2 isn't a "design error", it's a trade-off at any moment in time whether you support 64-bit addressing, doing so means a lot more transistors, and if (as with Intel) most of your customers are buying mid-range desktop machines that's a bad trade in 1992, in fact it was still a bad trade as recently as 5 years ago.
Item 3 is an improvement, but you mis-described NX, it doesn't "prevent buffer overflows" at all. It's a _marginal_ defense again deliberate stack smash attacks in which executable code is written during a buffer overflow. Buffer overflows have been used by Black Hats quite happily on Alpha, MIPS etc all these years despite non-executable stacks. It remains to be seen whether the development cost for this feature pays for itself in terms of raising the bar for black hats.
Item 1 is a trade-off again, but one that Intel should have made years ago, perhaps when they designed the 386. 128 registers means a lot more silicon, yet many inner loops will never use more than a dozen or so registers, meaning you either make price/performance worse, or you sacrifice something else (maybe vector instructions) to keep costs down. Every designer makes their own decisions here, and they're validated in the market. Eight wasn't enough, Sixteen is definitely closer to the sweet spot.
AMD made good trade offs with x86-64, they were rewarded in the marketplace and Intel are jumping on the same bandwagon now with EM64T.
RISC processors always have more cache than CISC processors, it's part of the design tradeoff. RISC takes less silicon to implement the core than CISC, which leaves more room to dedicate to the cache. Also the same complex operation requires more instructions on a RISC than a CISC, thus you need more L2 to keep the same amount of functional code in cache.
11*43+456^2
If I'm not totally incorrect we may see 64-bit GPUs in the next few years (2007?). IIRC, there was some remark from some ATI/nVidia guy somehere. Perhaps it was relating to the upcoming Unreal 3 technology, I really don't remember. Or, was it 128-bit colours? Hrrrmmm...
Over at X-bit labs, they have a more comprehensive review of these chips' Thermal characteristics and power consumption. You will still need a big PSU and a good HSF if you are going to multitask or play games on these puppies.
Its quite easy to see how biased the HotHardware review is towards Intel. You wonder how much intel paid them for that review, or let them break NDA early or something. Its a shame /. is giving them traffic for that bullshit "review".
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
Literally 3 days after I ordered a processor, Intel comes out with a new one. I haven't even received the other one yet, and it is obsolete. ;-)
Intel and HP chose to work together on a development effort to produce a totally new processor that offers drastically improved performance, but doesn't execute IA-32 code very well. AMD chose to emphasize IA-32 support instead of overall performance. As in the past, backward compatibility won out over superior technology, and AMD has been winning market share from Intel.
Intel is doing a course correction for its 64-bit strategy -- not suddenly moving into the 64-bit world.
Don't forget that Intel does a lot more than X86 CPUs too. They just retook the NOR flash sales title (admittedly after losing it, through another stupid business decision), and Hector Ruiz may now be mulling the sale of Spansion because of the intense competition. On one hand they are up against the wall WRT being forced to use band-aid solutions for the current P4 CPUs as a result of their bull-headed run for MHz, as well as the limited acceptance of Itanium. On the other hand, however, they are dominating the mobile sector with P-M and are expanding that platform; they also have their hands in things like WiMax and other emerging technologies; and don't forget they have enough money in the bank to probably buy AMD.
With Otellini now being fairly frank about the competitive landscape, I think it's possible that the company has reached a turning point.
Is it just me, or do you feel like you wasted your time reading (even skimming) that article? How can you compare Intel's new 64bit chips to an Athlon64 on a non 64bit OS. These "hot-hardware" guys obviously don't know much about computers to be testing 64bit chips in Windows. 64bit Windows XP will probably come out AFTER Longhorn....they are a long way away from figuring it out. Linux (and maybe BSD?) is the only way to really get an accurate test of these chips....sure running "legacy" 32bit apps is worth a look, but not the whole damn article. When will people learn that computers are about constant change and quit trying to be little fanboys of just one thing?
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
actually what happened with itanium is intel made a number of huge gambles on technology.
in order for itanium to be successful, every single one of them had to pan out.
what happened is virtually none of them panned out.
intel blew their load on a high risk gamble, and lost.