Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Poll on Prescott

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 1, 2004 8:57:29 PM

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new">If you feel like answering this poll...</A>

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

More about : poll prescott

February 2, 2004 10:29:10 AM

Hmmm... To this point, we've got:
----------------------------------------------------
65% - think Prescott has good or great potential.
35% - think prescott has little or no potential.
----------------------------------------------------
19% - think Prescott is a lousy processor.
46% - think Prescott is an OK processor.
23% - think Prescott is a great processor.
11% - think it's stupidity materialized.
----------------------------------------------------

So there you go. This is a ***bump***...



:evil:  <font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
February 3, 2004 7:48:30 AM

Nice results, Good job Intel!

AMD crowd loves to bump those Prescott threads.

No need to reply to those threads as the garbage contained inside is just bait you. they get ugly when provoked like a swarm of hornets.

Spitefire, have you checked out the new Prescott? Its got new SSE3 instructions and the smaller die will increase yeild per wafer to reduce costs for consumers while retaining performance of todays processor selection without hurting value of of chips in stock and on shelves. It would have been dumb of Intel to introduce a new processor and ruin the value of the existing line. Athlons competing against Celerons for sales, thats gotta hurt. Tough choice, but I would get the Celeron.

I bet BB will be pumped and ready after he hears this good news.


<b>"You haven't proven anything that once 64-bit support comes out, it will perform even better." -EDEN</b>
Related resources
February 3, 2004 7:55:15 AM

Just figured out how intel will deal with the heat problem. BTX will come with an attachment to your built-in vacuum system. That's one hot sucker.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 3, 2004 7:58:31 AM

>Athlons competing against Celerons for sales, thats gotta
>hurt.

Not really. If I'm not sorely mistaken, Athlon XP is some 30% smaller and therefore cheaper to produce than Celeron. The only thing hurting is the sucker that gets the Celeron. I hope you'll enjoy yours, be sure to post your 3DMarks.

Besides, give it a few months and P4 will be competing against Duron only.

>I bet BB will be pumped and ready after he hears this good
>news.

What news ? I've known this for ages..

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
February 3, 2004 8:18:10 AM

You didn't see the 3Dmark benchmarks from my 2.8E SL79K? They dont jive with THG benchmarks, but whatelse is new.
All of these were done with no overclock on the video card.

Stock 2K1 2.8Ghz
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7505268

Over clocked DX 9 4.1Ghz 292 1:1
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7511581

Overclocked 4.2Ghz 300FSB 5:4 2-2-2-5 Turbo 240Mhz
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm=1695882

Stock 2.8Ghz
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?pcm=1694147

2K3 300 5:4 2-2-2-5 Turbo
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1993406

My pure stock 2.8Ghz 6620 score will not publish, no error

GT1 - Wings of Fury 223.1 fps

GT2 - Battle of Proxycon 45.9 fps

GT3 - Troll's Lair 39.0 fps

GT4 - Mother Nature 37.7 fps

Something to compare too, its sad my mobo would not break 300Mhz FSB.

<b>"You haven't proven anything that once 64-bit support comes out, it will perform even better." -EDEN</b>
February 3, 2004 8:29:31 AM

So you are still doing 3Dmark hein i let that away long time ago.You know we dont make as much money as you.

Can you confirme anandtech scaling chart.

I dont like french test
February 3, 2004 9:11:16 AM

intel vs amd?
which is the best?

A fine day!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 3, 2004 9:30:04 AM

You'd get a Celeron.. so I was expecting your Celeron scores to compare to AXP scores. Sure hope you got a good supply of liquid nitrogen if you want to come close.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
February 3, 2004 11:29:35 AM

Updated!!! We've got...
----------------------------------------------------
66% - think Prescott has good or great potential.
34% - think prescott has little or no potential.
----------------------------------------------------
18% - think Prescott is a lousy processor.
48% - think Prescott is an OK processor.
23% - think Prescott is a great processor.
11% - think it's stupidity materialized.
----------------------------------------------------

Just as a curiosity, the previous sample with 25 votes in was within ±2% of the current results.
February 3, 2004 11:48:35 AM

So the update shows that the opinions have hardly changed at all?

Personally I think that Prescott is okayish at best. Had Intel even just taken Northwood and given it the larger cache and SSE3 then it would have been a much better immediate step forward. I sure hope that Prescott has a lot of hidden potential that we just are not seeing at the moment.


"Sad is the elephant upon the ice who went to put on his wooly coat only to realize that he left it in his other trunk." - DeEvolution
February 3, 2004 9:29:54 PM

Quote:

Athlons competing against Celerons for sales, thats gotta hurt. Tough choice, but I would get the Celeron.

Realy ? do all intel lovers think this way ?
Djeezus, so we are dicussing here with idiots ?


THG : The last 5-6 reviews have allways either had skewed results, or just somehow strangely come to a completly diferant conclusion then all of the other sites around.
February 3, 2004 9:33:38 PM

IMHO its okay.. if they can fix heat issues.. and support 64 bits in future. if not, it has no future only good to heat the room.
February 3, 2004 10:11:31 PM

Reasonable opinion, I'd say. You summed it all up in... 27 words. :smile:
February 4, 2004 1:41:30 AM

Relax on the insults, you dont want any of this.

I agree with the THG results skewed sig, my 2.8E outscoring the 3.4 EE @ stock speed makes me wonder.

<b>"You haven't proven anything that once 64-bit support comes out, it will perform even better." -EDEN</b>
February 4, 2004 3:04:38 AM

I think it's great because it is every bit as good as my xp2500+ @ 2.25. Do I think it's worth the asking price? Not on your life.
February 4, 2004 1:48:04 PM

Prescott is good for Intel's business, but it is mediocre for us enthusiasts. I may not buy a Prescott, but for each of me there are thousands (millions?) of other people who will. That is good business. Such is life.

At the least we should be happy that Prescott is not forcing all owners into DRM.


"Sad is the elephant upon the ice who went to put on his wooly coat only to realize that he left it in his other trunk." - DeEvolution
February 4, 2004 7:29:15 PM

<font color=blue>I agree with the THG results skewed sig, my 2.8E outscoring the 3.4 EE @ stock speed makes me wonder."</font color=blue>

Sounds like more Fabricated Fugger Facts (FFF for short).

<font color=blue>This is a Forum, not a playground. Treat it with Respect.</font color=blue>
February 5, 2004 12:19:51 AM

Things changed a bit on the statistics. Here's a quick update.

----------------------------------------------------
55% - think Prescott has good or great potential.
45% - think prescott has little or no potential.
----------------------------------------------------
18% - think Prescott is a lousy processor.
52% - think Prescott is an OK processor.
17% - think Prescott is a great processor.
13% - think it's stupidity materialized.
----------------------------------------------------

The last votes changed the overall result a bit. Right now, it's apparent that more people thought prescott is at least OK (2/3 of people think it's OK or great) but less people think it has a future (this went down from 65 to 55%).

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Mephistopheles on 02/05/04 00:21 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
February 5, 2004 1:28:07 AM

Prescott at the moment is ok, it'll come good once it moves to the LGA 775 socket and gets its clock speed ramped up.
February 5, 2004 5:54:05 AM

being a underling to OPPAINTER and [-peep-] AMD rigs really gets u upset doesnt iy
February 5, 2004 9:21:07 AM

You sound jealous, strange you pick him as he is on my team.

you have issues to work out and need to worry less about other peoples computers and more about staying on topic before you get bitch slapped.

<b>"You haven't proven anything that once 64-bit support comes out, it will perform even better." -EDEN</b>
February 5, 2004 11:08:41 AM

Mr. Fugger , i am running a intel rig , and this is the second time in this post that you have said your gonna open a can of whoop arse on someone . Don't know why but it just set me off sooooo ifin you wanna play mocho man just pm me and we will get togeather and both open a can. Gesssshh sounds like fun , we will see which one remains standing , heck i love ta play that game . Then you could learn respect for others . ( don't tell me they was smart arse cause i know they where , but they did not threatin to whip ya .
----------On topic now , i just seen the 2.8 Prescott and the price was'nt to bad . Got a chance to get a SL6Z5 2.8 ( higher dollars then 2.8 Prescott ) , think i will go for that and wait awhile on Prescott . The OC potentiall don't look to bad on the Prescott though . Gotta 2.6 now that don't wanna clock up though , that's why i am wanting the SL6Z5 stepping core . Got a ton of money in it already and might as well finish it off ( money that is ). After this i may go back to AMD .

The man of steel said that
!