Intel Launches Pentium Extreme Edition 955

BSG Man writes "Intel's 3.46 GHz Pentium Extreme Edition 955 dual-core processor launches today, and HotHardware has a full review with benchmarks on Intel's new i975X Express based D975XBX motherboard. This processor is based on Intel's 65nm (or .065 micron) Presler core with 2MB of full speed, on-die L2 cache dedicated to each core, for a whopping 4MB of total L2 cache. As expected, the new Pentium Extreme Edition 955 scores well in encoding, desktop business and a few professional rendering tests but overall it's given a run for its money by AMD's Athlon 64 X2 4800+ dual-core processor, especially in gaming scenarios."

Comments

is this a *real* launch?

[TubeSteak]

Is this a launch launch, or a paper launch?

I kinda got tired of reading about product launches that you couldn't go to a store and buy.

Finally

[Kickboy12]

About time Intel made a processor that gives the AMD 64 a run for it's money. But even though the new processor is using a smaller process, more L2 cache, and faster clock speeds, the AMD still comes out on top. Makes you realize how far ahead Intel is in technology, and yet how far behind they are in quality. I garuntee the next AMD X2 chips will feature the same 65nm process, and once again it will take Intel 1-2 years to make something that even comes close to it's rival.

(Thanks to PG&E I had to type this twice. Incompetant mother fuckers)

Re:Finally

[Kickboy12]

Oh, but it is "better technology". Mostly what I meant by "ahead in technology" was to reference the 65nm process. Which, inherintly, is a big step in chip development, and has alot of potential. However, what I was trying to get across, was I don't think Intel developed and pushed this technology as far as they could have, thus lack of quality. I believe AMD will do so, as they have done so in the past.

Re:Run for its money..

[Ritz_Just_Ritz]

The AMD 4800+ was faster in a LOT of the benchmarks, it's cheaper, it uses less power, and it's available today while the Intel part will be available in limited quantities sometime in January.

I think this is one of those times that Intel would prefer to have the benchmarkers say nothing and silently release their white elephant. 8-)

Re:Hope Dell Reads This Article

[floodo1]

just because on the retail end amd processor is cheaper, doesnt mean that DELL pays more for intel.
im sure they get incredible price breaks from intel.

Re:Wow! Look at it run benchmarks!!

[scgops]

I love that the Quake4 mainstream settings showed that each of the test systems ended up being GPU bound. That kinda makes it hard to take any of the graphics-based benchmark numbers seriously.

I wish the article reported numbers for the Intel chips that compare results with hyperthreading enabled vs. disabled. On servers, we routinely need to disable hyperthreading because it slows things down.

Personally, though, I don't think it matters much. I can't picture me plunking down my own cash for an Intel-powered system any time this decade.

Use words more precisely

[Dr. Spork]

When you say "given a run for its money" it suggests that the AMD chip's performance is about even with the EE Pentium. But this is wrong. The article itself concludes

"The Athon 64 X2 4800+ was the faster CPU in a majority of our real-world tests, and it consumed less power to boot."

But even that's a big understatement if you looked at the actual benchmark results. Neck and neck? Come on! Please, editors, accept submissions that aren't misleading.

Re:Hope Dell Reads This Article

[advocate_one]

and are they forcing you to buy Dell???

PR Ratings

[Agarax]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know what the Intel PR ratings mean? or are they just arbritary numbers?

955 doesn't really mean anything to me.

At least AMD tries to base theirs off something tangible.