Interesting read for anyone interested.
Interesting read for anyone interested.
Do note…two versions of the prescott cpu.
Socket 478 (to make everyone think intel is still supporting their boards), and Socket T (to make everyone realize just just got hosed).
Further more, early leaked tests indicate prescott is SLOWER at the same clock speed as a P4 in some applications.
Why? Intel increased the pipeline to 30 stages at the last minute. See Williamante P4 vs Pentium III syndrome.
and here was old elvis hoping away that the prescott would be a change for the better for intel, until a week ago when the rumours popped up that the pipeline was lengthened once again.
all the prescott release has done is cemented my decision to use AMD for the next 12 months. shoddy work.
yeah, I sure thought they were saying something about slowing the ramping up of clockspeed and working on efficiency… guess not. I’m pretty mad about this, going to buy an Opteron now…
I posted some prescott techbits over at 3dluvr…in case anyone is bored.
(The middle of the page, techbits)
ok. not to offend anyone. i read the entire article. my question is IS this article biased here? it just seems “odd”.
1 . errors on info about pipelines.
no info on temerature.
i don’t understand the benchmarks. i think i need to get given some of these for myself. to test. i do’t like the look of the sysmark tests.
4 what are the benchmarks saying? the current precotts are faster than the current athlons in everything apart from office?
- more errors. uhh off top of my head page 7,9. (these were taken from commentators.
its seems to me they have saacrificed quality for performance at all costs. am i right in saying this?
the points above are just question not a rant i just dont understand :hmm:
Some more articles…
The aceshardware one is pretty nice. Both of these include cg benchmarks.
thanx for that. i more intrested in video editing (reading aces hardware).
bottom line- Prescot is slower and runs hotter than a Northwood, but will be able to scale to higher clock speeds.
I think it’s far too early to say that it sucks or doesn’t. It’s not way slower than the Northwood. Couple frames in most cases. I think once they refine the new process, get the temperature under control, and programs that support its new instructions are written that it will be a contender. But just like the Northwood it needs time to spread its wings. Yes, they are readying a new chipset/socket but so is AMD. I am neither pro Intel nor AMD. I think the 64 is an awesome chip! I also think that unless you really need a new pc that it would be best to wait a couple months for these things to mature.
i was not aware that amd are readying a new chipset. i think you have potrayed this wrong. if AMD are releasing a new chipset then the old board will support the new processors.
the only thing that might happen is the athlon FX being overtaken by the athlon 64.
where as intel has released a pressoct for the existing P4 boards. and its pointless??
we need AMD or we’ll be running 5ghz in 2025.
Were not saying it “sucks” outright…but that the Socket 478 versions of Prescott suck.
The later versions (Socket T) which will be running at a much higher clock, which will show prescott’s power…and also their incredible ability to double as a space heater.
I don’t think it sucks, just that it’s a big disappointment. At the speeds it has been introduced, it is clock-for-clock slower than the Northwood in non-SSE3 apps. However, the proportional increase in speed vs clock is better than the Northwood, meaning that it gets more benefit from higher clocks than the Northwood, and, at high enough clock speeds, be faster than the Northwood. Also, there is always the Yamhill technology that is in the chip and can be exposed at any time Intel wishes (although I suspect that will happen right around the time when socket T hits…).
As for AMD: they are working on getting out the Socket 939 chipsets, and with them the REAL AthlonFX’s. Remember, the current AthlonFX is really just an Opteron under a different name and not what the AthlonFX is supposed to be.
Didn´t they implemented X86-64 in the prescott core? I think that´s the reason for any other thing if that´s true. If Intel wanna be on the 64-bit train their only solution would be X86-64 and with the upcoming Microsoft 64-bit OS.
yeah, the Prescot die has already been put under a lot of analasys before the chips were even available, and the conclusion was that it had some 64-bit functionality. However, you should also remember that HyperThreading was actually in the first Northwood cores (the Inq says it was in the Wilamettes, but I’m not so sure about that…) but wasn’t active until the P4C’s came along.
Originally posted by GregHess
and also their incredible ability to double as a space heater.
And conveniently just in time for an Australian winter.
Originally posted by milkyman
[B]the only thing that might happen is the athlon FX being overtaken by the athlon 64.
Huh? The Athlon FX is just the high-end Athlon 64 (with Dual Memory Channels, and more pins), what I heard was that the regular Athlon 64s might go to 939 pin as well…
Or was it that the FX will go to 754 pin?
The FX and 64 will both go to the 939 pin. The 64 will gain a dual channel memory controller but lose half the cache. 3700+ is supposed to be the last 64 with the 754 pin design (according to AMD’s roadmap). Pretty sure the Opteron will stay on the 940 for awhile though.
thats what i meant. the fx is expensive t make so they were changing it. i thought they were going to phase it out alltogether.
actually, the reason it’s expensive is that they aren’t really making FX’s yet. As I said before, what they are calling FX’s now are really just Opterons. The real FX’s aren’t available yet.