Prescott s478 64bit support?

[trox]

Hi guys, does anyone know if Intel ever released a s478 prescott that supports 64bit? I'm trying to upgrade one of my PCs and I came across this local seler who claims he is selling his Pentium 4 3.4 s478 processor with 64bit support.

He said the processor is from an OEM (branded) PC. Just want to ask if Intel really released such processor. Isn't cpu-z suppose to display em64t instead of x86-64?

Thanks.

 

[NMDante]

Hi guys, does anyone know if Intel ever released a s478 prescott that supports 64bit? I'm trying to upgrade one of my PCs and I came across this local seler who claims he is selling his Pentium 4 3.4 s478 processor with 64bit support.

He said the processor is from an OEM (branded) PC. Just want to ask if Intel really released such processor. Isn't cpu-z suppose to display em64t instead of x86-64?

Thanks.

i86x-64 is intel's 64-extension.

Not sure if any P4 have 64-bit compatiblity. Some might have 64-bit, but they aren't very good running in 64-bit, if I remember correctly.

At Intel's own site, only 1 P4 has 64-bit, and it's the EE version. Now the PDs do have 64-bit (EMT64 extension), and that CPU-Z looks like it's a dual core CPU. Maybe it's a CPU-Z of the PD 945 or 950, and not a P4 CPU. No P4 CPUs were dual core.

Of course, I could be wrong.

*edit*
After looking at Intel's site, there is no socket 478 @ 90nm, that runs at 3.4GHz. So maybe it's a fake. All the PDs, except for the 8xx series were @ 90nm.

Oh, and I did forget about HT, so that eliminates alot of the PDs, as well.

So, it's weird. Could be an underclocked P4 EE?

 

[trox]

hi nmdante: thanks for the reply. Are you referring to the LGA775 or a Socket 478? Cause this is socket 478 prescott. I'm just wonering why instead of em64t, cpu-z displays one of its features as x86-64.

 

[NMDante]

Well, looking at Intel's site, there are only a few P4s with 64-bit. The EE is the only true P4 with it, but it's clocked at 3.73GHz.

The 840EE is at 3.20GHz (same with the 840), and could be OC'd to 3.4GHz, but I am not sure how it would be labeled in CPU-Z.

The multiple cores could be from HyperThreading, which I forgot about.

So, it limits it to the P4 EE, 840, or 840EE CPUs.

 

[exit2dos]

Intel didn't implement 64 bit until the 600 series on socket 775.
http://www.cnet.com/4520-6022_1-5670788.html

But, it was rumored that Intel had "hidden 64 bit support" on the chips since Prescott was developed.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1474970,00.asp

 

[exit2dos]

*edit*
After looking at Intel's site, there is no socket 478 @ 90nm, that runs at 3.4GHz. So maybe it's a fake. All the PDs, except for the 8xx series were @ 90nm.

Oh, and I did forget about HT, so that eliminates alot of the PDs, as well.

So, it's weird. Could be an underclocked P4 EE?

I think all Prescotts were 90nm, and Intel did release a 3.2 and a 3.4 on S478 before switching to 775.
Intel kept quiet on most of its 64-bit desktop CPU development, so they wouldn't look like they were "copycatting" AMD. Which is what Microsoft forced them to do, as MS said they would only support one 64-bit set - and AMD had theirs out first (at least on the desktop).

 

[trox]

so does it mean that this cpu is one of the first prescotts that were developed by intel? And is it possible that inte made a specialized cpu for a certain pc maker? and thus enabled 64bit?

 

[vic20]

http://processorfinder.intel.com/list.aspx?ProcFam=483

Filter selection on EMT64

There are more than a few P4s with EMT64, and many were 90nm.

I would imagine that S478 CPU does actually support EMT64, just not officially until S775.

 

[trox]

can't seem to find s478 with em64t in it.

 

[exit2dos]

so does it mean that this cpu is one of the first prescotts that were developed by intel? And is it possible that inte made a specialized cpu for a certain pc maker? and thus enabled 64bit?

I doubt it was enabled for a specific customer. CPU-Z finds the capability.

 

[1Tanker]

so does it mean that this cpu is one of the first prescotts that were developed by intel? And is it possible that inte made a specialized cpu for a certain pc maker? and thus enabled 64bit?

CPU-Z reports it as an E0 Stepping, so it's nowhere near one of the first Prescotts. One of the last if anything.

 

[exit2dos]

CPU-Z reports it as an E0 Stepping, so it's nowhere near one of the first Prescotts. One of the last if anything.

It could be one of the first Prescotts. Intel may have just considered Prescott to be an upgrade on the Northwood line (remember, this is S478), and, hence, a new stepping letter.

Not sure, just speculating. :?

 

[1Tanker]

CPU-Z reports it as an E0 Stepping, so it's nowhere near one of the first Prescotts. One of the last if anything.

It could be one of the first Prescotts. Intel may have just considered Prescott to be an upgrade on the Northwood line (remember, this is S478), and, hence, a new stepping letter.

Not sure, just speculating. :?No...heres the P4 sSpec page. If you drop down the list to the lowest 3.4 1MB 90nm s478's, you'll see..D0 and E0. D0 being first. My P4 2.4A is a stepping E0, and the first stepping (overclocked @ [H]ardocp) was a C0.

2.4A
SL7E8 2.40A GHz N/A N/A 533 MHz 90 nm C0 1 MB 478 pin

3.4E
SL7PP 3.40 GHz N/A N/A 800 MHz 90 nm E0 1 MB 478 pin

SL7E6 3.40 GHz N/A N/A 800 MHz 90 nm D0 1 MB 478 pin

http://processorfinder.intel.com/list.aspx?ProcFam=483

 

[exit2dos]

Nice linkage. 8)

Thanks for the correction and clarification.

 

[1Tanker]

Nice linkage. 8)

Thanks for the correction and clarification.

Thanks...I really gotta say, that i think that screenshot is doctored. :?

 

[trox]

guys thanks for the inputs and links.. really..
The guy who is selling this processor is reliable in the local circuit.. he even told me that he searched for the Sspec on the cpu but he could not find it. Is there such processor that do not have Sspec indicated it it? Be it an OEM or Retail?

Regarding the x86-64, could it be the cpu-z version?

 

[K8MAN]

If it has a "J" after it I belive those were the first. The 570J was the first I believe and then it trickled down the line.

 

[m25]

CPUZ reports the same x86-64 on my athlon; it's the way it reports 64 bit instructions.