Prescott benchmarks

[Guest]

If you don't know Japanese, babelfish helps a bit, but not much:
http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1974
http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1975
http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1976

Mixed bag.. not really impressive IMHO compared to a 2.8 P4 except CPU bench (cache sensitive ?). Sure, BIOS may be early, silicon may be early and all that, still doesnt look earthshattering. It does look pretty hot though:
http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1973

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[Schmide]

Clicko
<A HREF="http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1974" target="_new">http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1974</A>
<A HREF="http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1975" target="_new">http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1975</A>
<A HREF="http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1976" target="_new">http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1976</A>
<A HREF="http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1973" target="_new">http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1973</A>

Dichromatic for your viewing plesure...

 

[Schmide]

I think these work...

<A HREF="http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/urltrurl?url=http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1974&lp=ja_en&tt=url" target="_new">Translated 1974</A>
<A HREF="http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/urltrurl?url=http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1975&lp=ja_en&tt=url" target="_new">Translated 1975</A>
<A HREF="http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/urltrurl?url=http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1976&lp=ja_en&tt=url" target="_new">Translated 1976</A>
<A HREF="http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/urltrurl?url=http://www.oc.com.tw/article/0309/readgoodarticle.asp?id=1973&lp=ja_en&tt=url" target="_new">Translated 1973</A>

Dichromatic for your viewing plesure...

 

[Guest]

thanks man, I was being lazy

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[Incitatus]

hmm I'm sure I'm reading this stuff right. But it looks to me like Prescott, for lack of better word, sux. Or at least is absolutely nothing special.

 

[bandikoot]

Saying it sux is going a little overboard I think, but nothing special might be a little more accurate. It does seem to offer some improvement in certain areas over the current 2.8 offering from Intel, but from the numbers in the synthetics I don't know if it will offer that much real world performance increase.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I think that stating something like "prescott suxs" right now is just stupid. We saw plenty of benchmarks on the A64 before its launch, and many led us to believe that A64 was a less than ideal product, to say the least. However, thinking that way was a mistake. A64 is, to say the very least, a very respectable product.

Besides, this site's benchmarks have me scratching my head... How come the 2.8Ghz Scotty scores <i>below</i> the 2.8Ghz Northwood in so many benchmarks? This is not at all reasonable...

I think it would be more appropriate to just wait and see...

After all, most people were thinking that A64 would get released at 2.0Ghz, and it got out at 2.2Ghz. What if Intel decides to release Scotty @ 3.6 or 3.8Ghz? I don't really doubt that their silicon is capable of this... I mean, even if they have troubles with heat, they've still got 2 months to iron them out...

<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles

 

[Incitatus]

touche

I was just suprised, I had expected substantially better performance.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I had expected substantially better performance.

Who knows? Maybe you'll still see that improvement.

Seriously, how can this be true? A 2.8Ghz Scotty outperformed by a 2.8Ghz NW? With doubled cache? Extra instructions? Improved architecture? Either this site is providing faulty benchmarks or Intel has monkeys working on their chips now!

<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles

 

[Guest]

You're right, you shouldnt read *too* much into those benches. could be a bios issue, agp/driver/whatever or a HT related thing.

However, it is indeed quite possible Prescott will perform slower the NW on specific apps. its pipeline has been increased in lenght to allow higher clock speeds, and some apps just don't care about L2/3 cache and no apps care for those new instructions until they are recompiled to take advantage of them.. . In those case, you may well see some decrease on a clock for clock basis. I'm not saying thats what we are seeing here, but it is possible.

As for the 4+ GHz speed thing. I think even northwood may be able to get damn close to 4 GHz, if it werent for the 160W this requires. The two months intel has, are really not enough to iron out any thermal issue with Prescott though, don't count on it, but a next revision somewhere next year might. That is if, it is a design issue, and not process issue (ie, current leaking on .09). We will know in a while

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[rain_king_uk]

Exactly.

Remember the P4 sucked clock for clock versus the P3.

 

[endyen]

Might explain the EE. Just the same, I believe that in Nov. we will see much better numbers. It may not make the A64@ 2.2 look terrible though if this is any indication.

 

[32bitp]

I think that stating something like "prescott suxs" right now is just stupid. <b>We saw plenty of benchmarks on the A64 before its launch, and many led us to believe that A64 was a less than ideal product</b>, to say the least. However, thinking that way was a mistake. A64 is, to say the very least, a very respectable product.

Besides, this site's benchmarks have me scratching my head... How come the 2.8Ghz Scotty scores below the 2.8Ghz Northwood in so many benchmarks? This is not at all reasonable...

I think it would be more appropriate to just wait and see...

After all, most people were thinking that A64 would get released at 2.0Ghz, and it got out at 2.2Ghz. What if Intel decides to release Scotty @ 3.6 or 3.8Ghz? I don't really doubt that their silicon is capable of this... I mean, even if they have troubles with heat, they've still got 2 months to iron them out...

Show me the "plenty of Opteron or A64 benchmarks" before launch that led many of us to believe the A64 was a less than ideal product!

show me the less then ideal benchmarks!
either that or maybe it was just wishful thinking by you and alot of others here at THG's.

 

[rain_king_uk]

Yeah the Opteron benches I saw suggested the A64 would rock the games world, and it does.

 

[simwiz2]

There was at least one where the Opteron was slower than the AXP 3200. I don't remember what site though.

 

[HardWareBoss]

Why are they using 2.8 Scotty that is coming out 1st qtr 2004? Scotty release this year is 3.2 or 3.4. Unless Intel changes things and releases a faster chip.

 

[Kelledin]

Well, it <i>is</i> probably a pre-release engineering sample that doesn't have all the kinks worked out. That's what early Hammers were. Even the production Opterons didn't have <i>all</i> the performance kinks worked out.

Also, some of us may remember a pre-release benchmark of an original K7 ES from years back. I certainly remember it, although I can't remember who did it. My first thought on reading it was, "man, wtf? this K7 thing is going to suck on release. :frown: "

See how wrong I was?

<i>I can love my fellow man...but I'm damned if I'll love yours.</i>

 

[Mephistopheles]

Show me the "plenty of Opteron or A64 benchmarks" before launch that led many of us to believe the A64 was a less than ideal product!

show me the less then ideal benchmarks!
either that or maybe it was just wishful thinking by you and alot of others here at THG's.

Wait a second there! You <i>have</i> to be kidding!

You accused me of wishful thinking, just because you didn't see the reviews? How come you're so upset with this?

I just woke up and have to work right now, but rest assured that I will explain myself later...

<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles