Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Prescott

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 8, 2003 3:10:23 AM

With the launch of Prescott on 11 May. With 16KB L1 cache, 800 FSB and 1M L2 cache. What is AMD launching?

More about : prescott

a b à CPUs
March 8, 2003 3:14:13 AM

I hear an "400MHz" bus Barton. It will probably be 1.8GHz and rated as an XP 3600+, if AMD keeps this [-peep-] up.

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>
March 8, 2003 3:26:16 AM

Man, I am going to be really disappointed if the 400 FSB Barton isn't at LEAST 2.2 gigahertz. That MIGHT justify a realistic 3200+ rating, depending on how much Barton benefits from synchronous operation with DDR400. I'm hoping for 2.3 or 2.4 ghz. I don't think AMD is realistically going to be hitting 2.5 or higher, but considering the little bit of headroom Barton had for overclocking, I think 2.4 Ghz (3500+?) might be realistic. If not, I definitely am going Intel for my May upgrade.


<-----Insert witty sig line here.


<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Twitch on 03/08/03 00:33 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
Related resources
March 8, 2003 4:06:16 AM

I guess having SSE2 included in this Barton 800 isn't going to happen. Didn't AMD get a license starting this year? That was all the scuttlebutt last year. Funny how things change when they stay the same.

Dichromatic for your viewing plesure...
a b à CPUs
March 8, 2003 4:07:36 AM

I don't think they'll have too much difficulty getting it up to 2.2GHz. They'll probably call that an XP 4400+ or something.

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>
March 8, 2003 4:20:57 AM

Barton 800. Lol! Wouldn't that be JUST LIKE AMD at this point? Actually, they'll probably call it Barton 800+.

I know Hammer will have SSE2, but that will be the first.

To Crash: Do you think AMD's PR rating has been fairly accurate, say +/- 5% so far?

I think the answer is a qualified "yes." The big qualifier is:

The P4 system must be on a similar platform to the competing AMD, e.g. DDR333, and not Rambus RAM. (Even that is beginning to change, though, with newer DDR RAM solutions on P4's outperforming RD-RAM.)

While I understand the reason for the PR system (AMD protecting itself from uneducated consumers and stupid retailers) I think we are seeing the weaknesses of it: It simply cannot ramp accurately. Let's say the new P4 is o a 3.2 gig with HT and 800 FSB. For the Barton to realistically compete, AMD will have to go to 400 FSB and probably a 2.4 gig processor (speculation.) So, will AMD call that new processor a 3500+, which it would be relative to the 3000+, or will they call it a 3200+, which it would be relative to the P4???

Ohh the tangled web...

<-----Insert witty sig line here.


<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Twitch on 03/08/03 01:32 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
March 8, 2003 4:39:12 AM

Quote:
I guess having SSE2 included in this Barton 800 isn't going to happen. Didn't AMD get a license starting this year? That was all the scuttlebutt last year. Funny how things change when they stay the same.


AMD was free as soon as SSE2 was released to design their own implementation. That's the agreement for cross-listencing. It takes time, however, to implement a dramatic SIMD extension. The Palomino went through an entire core redesign, which incorporated SSE. I doubt AMD will devote the same resources, not with Hammer so close to release.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
March 8, 2003 5:00:46 AM

SSE2 doesn't really fit in the XP system does it? Being that data paths are 64bits wide. 128 bit memory paths are a must for dual double precision streaming data.

Dichromatic for your viewing plesure...
March 8, 2003 6:05:57 AM

I don't think that matters much. Current SSE vectors are 128-bits anyway. It's just 4x32-bit FP instead of 2x64-bit FP. The problem isn't that it won't fit, it's that the work required to add the implementation would take resources. Resources AMD is not willing to spare.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
March 8, 2003 10:44:15 AM

I also think that the PR system has weaknesses and is ultimately going to cause confusion and mistrust. The question I always ask is this: If the Barton 2800+ had its name justified, then it would be competing with a T-bred of same performance. Given that there is no other distinguishable feature except performance (Barton-Tbred, I mean), why would AMD release these two to compete with each other?

What do you people think, will Prescott outperform the next generation of Bartons (looks that way to me)? What about Hammer, with 64 bit extensions, and the rumors about prescott having disabled 64-bit extension on-chip (as HT was disabled, until recently) as a safeguard against AMD´s plans? Any news on that?

I´d say that if the rumors are true, then (1) the Prescott should outperform the Hammer in any case and (2) Intel wouldn´t activate the extensions until AMD spent lots resources in convincing people to go 64-bit-ext. Then Intel would kick in (with its 81% market share) and continue the job, with a weakened rival. (is this realistic?) OK, nothing like a little conspiracy in competitions...
March 8, 2003 7:13:24 PM

You and I are thinking the same thing on this one.

I like AMD, but I'm afraid they are beginning to suffer from the inherent disadvantages of limited resources; they just don't have as many fabs as Intel, nor as much money to spend R&D'ing fifty things at once.

AMD surpassed Intel with something of a sneak attack with Athlon. Intel has taken the gloves off since. I think features such as HT and 64-bit extensions, which sit dormant on a core design until Intel needs to activate them, show just how flexible Intel is in comparison to AMD; and it's AMD's lack of flexibility that's killing them right now.

I really doubt Barton will be in the same class as Prescott. In fact, I have a sneaky feeling that Prescott is going to make Barton look like an old, well-worn architecture. The worst part is: I think Hammer is going to be a disappointment. That's just a feeling I get, and I might be totally off-base but--much like the GeForce FX--the Hammer is going to be released six months too late, missing its maximum market impact. Just MHO, but I am not getting good vibes from AMD right now.


<-----Insert witty sig line here.
March 8, 2003 10:26:59 PM

The reason AMD doesn't just keep the T-Bred "2800+" and instead wants to introduce Barton is simple. It takes a different manufacturing machine to make Barton. They obviously want their top line chips to be Barton, but why add the extra cost of keeping the machines that make the T-Bred around? Why not just have one type of machine make all Bartons and bin them to sell at different speed grades? This is primarily why all manufacturers (including Intel) release newer versions of older speed grades (the lower model P4's don't need to be built on the .13 micron copper interconnect with 512KB of L2 cache, but it's more costly to keep around the machines that make the older willamettes).

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
March 9, 2003 12:07:12 AM

Nothing for a short story.Still waiting for a hammer i guess they will have to call IBM to debug there chip again.




[-peep-] french
March 9, 2003 12:09:32 AM

AMD surpassed Intel with something of a sneak attack with Athlon. Intel has taken the gloves off since. I think features such as HT and 64-bit extensions, which sit dormant on a core design until Intel needs to activate them, show just how flexible Intel is in comparison to AMD; and it's AMD's lack of flexibility that's killing them right now

And rusian hav a special commando to attack US in two week.

[-peep-] french
March 9, 2003 12:45:52 AM

Isn't Prescott going to have HT2 when its released in May?
March 9, 2003 1:20:50 AM

??? Your point?


<-----Insert witty sig line here.
March 9, 2003 1:48:11 AM

Prescott with HT2 and 3.2 Gig CPU. Unless Intel decides to go to 3.4. That woukd be nice. Price for Prescott $637 Lets see what happens by 11 May.
March 9, 2003 8:06:49 PM

Say hi to juin, the forum's weird comment spewer, aside from his lax english.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
March 9, 2003 10:02:19 PM

i KNOW you didn't write that post yourself
semicolons and all??? nahhh

--------------
I LOVE DANGER DEN WATERCOOLING, they went out of their way to both personalize my kit and change my order when i needed to, i had to change my sig to give them props
March 9, 2003 10:07:43 PM

He was quoting!

Sadly there are still many, even those who have been here for years like Juin, who don't know how to quote.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
March 11, 2003 11:37:03 PM

<<<Prescott with HT2 and 3.2 Gig CPU. Unless Intel decides to go to 3.4. That woukd be nice. Price for Prescott $637 Lets see what happens by 11 May.>>>
prescott will also be available at speeds as low as 2.4ghz. and u may have to wait until june.
March 12, 2003 12:57:00 AM

simply your conpiracing theory is funny.

[-peep-] french
March 12, 2003 1:10:28 AM

I was under the impression Intel's implementation of 64bit was radically different to AMD's, ie: they need different OS's to run 64bit.
March 12, 2003 1:42:53 AM

Well, yes, the implementation is different. In fact, intel has NOT "implemented" 64 bit in their processor, but rather designed a completely new processor based on 64-bit technology, exclusively. This is Itanium and IA-64, a completely new architecture. What AMD is doing is extending registers to 64-bit and some other architectural implementations to support 64-bit functionality on a 32-bit processor - which is x86-64. Both are theoretically backwards compatible with 32-bit tech, but because x86-64 is less of an "alien" to 32-bit, it should feel more at home with 32-bit apps.

And then, there´s something else... Which is what we are talking about. It´s a secret implementation of 64-bit-extensions to the pentium desktop processors codenamed Yamhill, a skunkworks project that supposedly leaked. Yamhill technology is supposed to be on Prescott already, and disabled, in much the same way that HT was disabled on cores as early as Willamette (I don´t think anyone knew about that then), and can, whenever needed, be activated to counter Hammer technology. Its existence sounds perfectly reasonable and plausible to me, but it is something of a conspiracy theory.

Oh, and rain_king_uk, they do need different OS´s (IA64 and x86-64) The architectural differences are substantial. The question is: If Yamhill exists, then it should be similar to x86-64, so from what OS will it benefit? The same as Athlon 64?

In any case, the OS market should react strangely to Athlon 64. Will Prescott use 32-bit version and Athlon a 64-bit version? So, there´ll be a windows specific to each company. I don´t think we´ve seen this picture in the PC market ever. Maybe the OS´s will become more finely tuned with the processors they use, but that would be a step backwards in compatibility, in my opinion. The whole thing doesn´t sound very right... It feels somewhat like a "only one will survive" competition, if you ask me... I don´t like that.
March 13, 2003 2:23:16 AM

Twitch How does AMD compete with Barton at 400 FSB and 2.4 Gig Chip? When Prescott will have 800 FSB 3.2 or 3.4 Gig Chip?
March 13, 2003 2:34:17 AM

Do you understand how the PR rating works with AMD, and that an Athlon is usually 30% to 40% faster than an equivalently clocked P4?

Okay, maybe the P4 will REALLY benefit from the improved memory performance, the few extra instructions, the improved FP to integer conversions, and AMD would have to go to 2.6 or even 2.7 ghz to beat a 3.2 gig Prescott. (Which I don't think Barton can do.)

At this point it's all speculation anyway, since we don't have any benchmarks on the Prescott. I figure a 400FSB Barton at 2.4 gig would be about as fast as a current P4 533FSB at 3.3 gig to 3.4 gig.


<-----Insert witty sig line here.


<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Twitch on 03/13/03 00:18 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
March 13, 2003 2:35:30 AM

soory even a A64 at 2.8 GHZ will be outpeforme by the entry level Presscott (3.4GHZ)

[-peep-] french
March 13, 2003 2:50:20 AM

Is Prescott going to be that fast? Gee, I hope so! I'm planning on buying one come upgrade time! However, I didn't foresee a 25-30% per cycle improvement over Northwood, which is what you seem to be suggesting.

I think you are speculating just as much as I am since:
A: We don't even know how fast A64 will be in 32-bit apps and;
B: We don't know how fast Prescott will be.

Of course, you welcome to reveal any inside sources you may have.

Oh! And I meant to ask you before...exactly what conspiracy theory did I forward? You said my conspiracy theory was funny, and I don't remember forwarding any conspiracy theory.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Twitch on 03/13/03 00:36 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
March 13, 2003 4:26:28 PM

Oh! And I meant to ask you before...exactly what conspiracy theory did I forward? You said my conspiracy theory was funny, and I don't remember forwarding any conspiracy theory

The good old story that intel keep feature disable until they need it.

Yamhill project i dont believe that presscott have it but yes i think that intel have made a back up plan but as long they can produce a Ia-64 Ia-32 chip is no need to put yamhill in the chip.Also Alpha ISA can be put in pentium and be non-compatible to K8.

For Ht disable have you see perf before they change to C1 stepping most of the time it was a decrease in perf.

[-peep-] french
March 13, 2003 4:27:47 PM

25% yes maybe over 533 FSB northwood close to 50%.

[-peep-] french
March 14, 2003 1:23:43 AM

Since IA 32 is just a nickname of x86-64, how does IA64 relate to IA32 if they added it on the die? Like, how does it interact and maintain compatibility like x86-64 does?

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
March 14, 2003 1:42:51 AM

Regarding Yamhill on die or not on-die with Prescott, my point was that Intel is far more flexible than AMD. They can have more "irons on the fire" at one time. And it's Intel's vast resources and flexibility that is putting AMD behind right now.

Regarding Prescott--So, you're saying that a 3.4 ghz Prescott will be as fast as a 4.3 ghz Northwood 533 FSB and maybe as fast as a 5.1 Ghz?



<-----Insert witty sig line here.


<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Twitch on 03/13/03 10:51 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
March 14, 2003 1:46:41 AM

AMD's first 64bit Opteron will be 2 Gig. Than they will go up from there.
March 14, 2003 1:52:36 AM

Twitch Prescott will be that fast. I'm thinking of buying one for my upgrade. BUT!!!! $630.00 may be a little bit do steep in price. Now if Intel would sell it for say $450- $500 Out the door. It would put AMD so far behind Intel.
March 14, 2003 1:14:26 PM

IA-32 intel architecture 32 bit (Cisc)
IA-64 intel architecture 64 bit (Vliw)

Multiple Front end

2 fetch engine 1 decoder for IA32 1 renaming logic for Ia32 1 shelduler for IA-32.Share cache and TBL share Excution core share.With SMT it may be even posible to make work IA-64 and IA-32.I gues there register as to be indépendant.

Option 2 stick a P4 core on a Montecino that not even add 5% of the die size.

1 of the issue is Mackinley core have 7 pipeligne made for server app P4 20 to 30 for multimedia and others.

[-peep-] french
March 14, 2003 1:47:49 PM

There info at the Inquirer that intel will release presscott up to 3.6 ghz consider there a good chance there a 3.4 ghz NW will be release (paper launch).

Let try to see what Presscott can offer on older software.

Canterwood perf 3+
533 to 800 FSB 10+
1MB L2 5 to 10+
16 KB L1 data cache ??? if lantency go up in some acces close to zero if the lantecny keep at 7 cycle for the FPU and 2 for the ALU about 3% to 5% at best

Rumor at chip-architect that X-trance cache is now 24 KB and have now a 4 instruction bandwith per cycle there a good 5% right there of improvement

Improve Branch prediction Hmm hard to say but P4 can gain a lot of perf her if there a real improvement X+=% improvement

Improve Pre fetch engine same thing as the branch prediction.P4 stall in pipeligne greatly decrease is perf.x=% of improvement

Decrease lantency at ALU multiplier In others word it take less cycle.NB of cycle less=the % of improvement.

increase in write buffer ??? to hard to predict is may be just a need of 1 of the new feature.

PNI 0% exception to spec benchmark who can now make better use of HT mainly the spec int/fpu rate.

Games wont much faster as GPU is still the bottleneck part.

the real gain will appear in photo shop where is better alu will really help and the larger cache.

To sum up eveything

20% increase there 15 % that come from the new interface that about the same gain that A64 made from is intergrade MCH.There about 4 unknow value as imposible to predict with accuracy.do your guess 5% 10% 15% 50% 10000%.The 50% may look funny but there some issue with the die photo that made me think that there maybe a 2 reapid excution core (there about 1% that is really true as much of it will go waste) also FPU data flow have change is the chip is may be a relayout to decrease lantency from cache or just conter the increase in size of L1 to keep everything at the same lantency.


Until there a real PDF on it we are just speculation some feature that websie report from IDF may just be bad interpretation of the info given there.


[-peep-] french<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by juin on 03/14/03 10:52 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
March 15, 2003 2:29:32 AM

So Prescott may launch at 3.6 Gig? AMD better come up big with their next Barton. Or they"ll being eating Intel's smoke.
March 15, 2003 5:15:53 AM

Agreed... I am also fed up with AMD that's why I'm now running Granite Bay mobo and my old 1.7+ sits in the corner serving files and heating my room ;) 

To err is human... to really screw things up you need a computer!
March 15, 2003 11:56:40 AM

that´s what everyone is thinking right now. AMD better have one hell of a plan this year...

OK, Opteron will probably enter the server market and make a stand there, because people always write specific code for servers. But unless A64 gets strong software support on the desktop, which isn´t here yet at all, then it´ll have to compete against Prescott in 32-bit apps. Who´d win that match?...

Plus, it does sound as if AMD is somewhat out of technologies to fight right now; their next barton is up against canterwood and P4 3.2Ghz HT with 800Mhz FSB and dual DDR400, and A64 isn´t due until september to help them in the desktop market.
March 15, 2003 7:16:29 PM

The one place I expect some serious recovery for AMD would be in SSE2 optimized situations.
With SSE2, and the K8 FPU, I think it's a safe bet to say they will reclaim the FPU crown.

That aside, I agree, the delay better be for core modifications instead of the supposed OS awaiting. (THG also reported that the September launch means December availability at the earliest)

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
March 15, 2003 8:07:11 PM

I find it interesting that nobody seems to care about prescott's implimentation of palladium. It will be the first CPU sporting it, and I won't be buying one because of it.
March 15, 2003 9:07:16 PM

That´s right!! I forgot about it, Hammer also supports SSE2. About the FPU crown going to AMD? Hm... Well, you might bet on that, Eden, but I wouldn´t do so... I think I´ll wait and see... After all, still, the Prescott can, if necessary, be scaled to about twice the clock of the A64. (won´t the A64 start at around 1600-2000Mhz?) So it´ll better be one hell of a FPU unit on the A64!

Quote:
That aside, I agree, the delay better be for core modifications instead of the supposed OS awaiting. (THG also reported that the September launch means December availability at the earliest)

Completely with you on this one! December availability means Intel has some decent time to prepare - which is why I wouldn´t really try to predict the outcome of these processor wars...
March 15, 2003 9:14:01 PM

If that´s your reason not to buy a Prescott processor, then you´d better stick with a VIA processor, because Hammer has it too. Or something similar, I´ve heard.

Anywhay, I haven´t read a lot about Palladium yet. What´s the big deal about it? (Sorry for asking - but hey, this is the right place to do so, right?)
March 15, 2003 9:27:16 PM

Well, if you care enough about Palladium that you will refuse to buy it, you better form a pretty large coalition able to exert some market pressure on both Intel and AMD. Otherwise, P4 3.2 Gig Northwood will be the most powerful option open to you ten years from now. There will be 15 gig processors, of course, but you won't use them because they'll have something like Palladium on them.






<-----Insert witty sig line here.
March 15, 2003 10:06:46 PM

Yup, that's how I would've phrased it to those who will refuse to buy new chips due to the implementation of Palladium. "Stick with yer 486 people!!!" *rolls eyes*

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
March 15, 2003 10:10:57 PM

Per clock, the Pentium4 with SSE2 can actually be significantly better than the AthlonXP. Up to 40% in fact, something derangingly powerful, considering it has 2 FPUs only!
In single normal FPU operations, per clock, the K7 rapes of course, but now that most applications support SSE2 and the Pentium 4 is leaps ahead in clock speed, it easily is able to counter its architectural weakness and utilize its strengh with that.
With SSE2, there is a good chance that AMD can come back competing. Will they win in overall performance? Depends majorly on the clock speed and IPC gains. But one thing is for sure. In SSE2 apps, it will definitly rule per clock, but like I said, not sure about overall performance (once clock speeds are set).

And I do feel rather depressed when thinking of the processor wars. I am sure AMD won't compete well, and with Prescott out, it'll likely be monopolistically priced, since AMD cannot deliver. Oh if only AMD did their job. This year could've been so exciting, but, like last year, it's only depressing.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
March 15, 2003 11:50:45 PM

AMD is taking way to long!!!! releasing new chips. Thats why I'm going with Intel Prescott 3.2 3.4 Or 3.6 whatever they release. 800 FSB plus SSE2.
March 16, 2003 12:19:34 AM

You know, I can´t help it but get this impression: look at the two companies: Intel and AMD:

<b>Intel</b> releasing HT, Canterwood, excellent plans for Prescott, and ramping up clock speed as if it´s no big deal, moving to 90nm still this year...
<b>AMD</b> struggling to get their x86-64 tech going, being VERY late aready, and releasing Bartons that don´t really match their PR rating... It took them months to counter the 3.06Ghz P4 HT with the 3000+ Barton... which actually <i>doesn´t</i> reach the performance of the 3Ghz P4...

It looks like Intel can always deliver with ease and AMD is suffering a lot... So, if A64 performs admirably due to SSE2, then who is to say Intel can´t just as easily counter going to 4+Ghz with Prescott? A64 won´t be really on the market until the very end of 2003... Everything looks so damned easy for Intel!!! That´s the impression I get. Am I wrong or what?
March 16, 2003 12:31:46 AM

Like I said. Intel is in the eviable position of having just WAAAAY more money than is healthy, and AMD is in the opposite position. Intel doesn't take AMD lightly any more, which is probably the worst thing possible for AMD. Being late with A-64 kills them. Think of how different things would be right now if Hammer was out and on the market--right now!--like it was supposed to be! Intel would be behind AMD, and AMD would be working towards NextGen A-64. Trouble is, AMD hit a speed bump. When Intel hits a speed bump, and some technology doesn't pan-out like they planned, they just retool and implement something else, or go to Plan B. When you have a dozen multi-billion dollar fabs around the world, you can do that. When AMD hits a snag, it appears there really is no "Plan B."


<-----Insert witty sig line here.
March 16, 2003 3:40:52 AM

AMD when the race to 1 gig CPU First. But since than what have they done. They where going to release Hammer at the end of last year. I was going to buy their Chip. Now it won't be to the end of this year. I'm not waiting for them. I'll buy Prescott.
!