Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

new prescott ready for may

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 12, 2004 1:09:02 PM

http://developer.intel.com/design/pcn/Processors/

Intel have promise lower temp for prescott in a short time.it been report by aceshardware review of prescott.

for the full version

http://developer.intel.com/design/pcn/Processors/D01038...



Just to show dad

More about : prescott ready

February 12, 2004 1:20:56 PM

I found a good 1 in the erreta of intel.Some may remmeber that presscott was having probleme with it FSB.Look like it was true.

ftp://download.intel.com/design/Pentium4/specupdt/24919...

N89 FSB not metting specification.It been solve but still it was true a month ago.

Just to show dad
February 12, 2004 3:49:14 PM

Very good, it indicates that Intel is working on prescott actively. They should, indeed. And fast.

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>
Related resources
February 12, 2004 5:52:16 PM

Rather than introducing a Hot'n Prescott, Intel should have kept the Northwood in business for a 3.4GHz and a 3.6 GHz version and then debuted the Prescott at 3.8GHz.

Alternatively an early Prescott should have been WITHOUT the long 31 stage pipeline. I doesn't make sense to have a CPU with a 31 stage pipeline at so low clock-speeds.

Most importantly, Intel should have done a better job of keeping temperatures low, because imagine the kind of thermal problems that the current Prescott will experience over time.

All in all, I have to say, Intel didn't make the right decision when they decided to introduce Prescott in it's current form. I know they are paving the way for higher clock-speeds with the 31 stage pipeline, but that doesn't help the current versions with their lower clock-speed in any way.

I'll have to stick with Northwood right now, and then maybe switch to A64. The reason for this being Cool and Quiet, ready for 64 bit OS, plus the system does not require insane fast memory modules (PC4400 and the like) to perform well. A P4 system CAN compete with A64, but requieres PC4400 memory together with an extreme FSB. Most people can't afford that.

<i>/Copenhagen - Clockspeed will make the difference... in the end</i> :cool:
February 12, 2004 6:23:45 PM

Off course they "are working on it". they always do, how else do you think these companies manage to introduce newer speedgrades all the time ? Given Prescotts current thermal output I would even guess there is no way intel could launch 3.4+ parts without a lower P stepping. I will be curious to see how much lower the next stepping will be though.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
February 12, 2004 6:56:43 PM

Prescott it seems is what intel has realized that they still want to continue with the P4 architecture. I wonder what intels gonna name a P5...


~AMD=RULES.PRESCOTT=4=FOOLS~
February 12, 2004 7:45:40 PM

Quote:
I wonder what intels gonna name a P5...

Redundantium.


"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 12, 2004 7:49:07 PM

"Alternatively an early Prescott should have been WITHOUT the long 31 stage pipeline. I doesn't make sense to have a CPU with a 31 stage pipeline at so low clock-speeds."

Prescott was designed to have this pipeline many many months maybe years ago. At that time, 2002, clock speeds went from 2.0GHz to 3.06Ghz from Jan to December. That would project Feb 2004 to be over 4GHz at the rate they were going. Prescott may have been intended for a 4.0 or 4.2GHz launch, considering THG got a Northwood at 3.06 to run at 4.1GHz stable with compressor cooling a year ago i dont find a P4 making it to 3.8 with air cooling too far out. Something may have happened and things just didnt work out for intel. Presocott will hit 3.6 to 3.8Ghz pretty soon and then we can see it overtake northwood. (MY POOR NORTHWOOD IS JEALOUS!!!) Also Prescott scales better than northwood so a prescott 3.8 would beat down a northwood at 3.8. Cant wait to see the 4Ghz barrier passed by intel before amd hits 3GHz.

PS amd users please dont flame me, i know an A64 at 2.4GHz kills all the P4's at 3.4 in gaming. And P4 wins in media encoding. Its all about what you use your PC for. A64 isnt always the best and P4 isnt always the best. Thats all there is to it. I prefer intel CPUs becuase i spend twice as much time producing video than I do playing games and my most intense game is 4x4 Evo2 or Quake III Arena so a northwood and a R9600Pro makes me plenty happy.

You cut up intel for reusing the Pentium name but I bet AMD will stick with Athlon for quite a while. Its been around for 5 years and Pentium for 11. People called the Pentium II (4 years after the original Pentium) redundant too.

Ya don't say? Is that so?<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by PCfreak15 on 02/12/04 04:51 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
February 12, 2004 8:50:03 PM

YOu got it right but prescott face many probleme.Also it not clear what intel want to do with is new prescott.

Just to show dad
February 12, 2004 8:54:19 PM

>Cant wait to see the 4Ghz barrier passed by intel before
>amd hits 3GHz.

Just for the record; 4 GHz is 17% faster than what is available today (from intel. 3GHz is 25% more than what AMD has currently. Either way, I have little doubt intel will produce 4 GHz chips before AMD has a 3 GHz chip. I do have doubts though, if 4 GHz P4 will be better than a ~2.7 Ghz A64/FX. Time will tell.

>People called the Pentium II (4 years after the original
>Pentium) redundant too.

I think his reduntant comment referred to the fact that there are a lot of unexplained transistors in Prescott; could be wrong though.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
February 12, 2004 9:37:32 PM

"Also it not clear what intel want to do with is new prescott"

Its very clear. higher yeild on larger wafer = lower costs = bad for AMD

Maintaining performance levels to keep value of existing Northwoods.

<b>"You haven't proven anything that once 64-bit support comes out, it will perform even better." -EDEN</b>
February 12, 2004 10:14:18 PM

Pentium squared (I can't make the little 2.) The fifth of the 586. It would make a lot of sense. Maybe I should market it...

<b>wooooow <font color=red> Killer Klowns </font color=red> ... from <font color=blue>outer space</font color=blue>... HOLY SH¡T!</b>
February 13, 2004 12:58:35 AM

I wonder if Intel has truly managed to reduce power consumption by a significant factor with this D0 stepping?...

As for Reduntantium: It's not truly reduntant, from my point of view. It's two fives, but these are numbers in a name, so I don't see that much of a redundancy at all. Double-Five is not equal to five. It's like naming a part 5-1, then 5-2, 5-3, 5-4 and 5-5. It would be the fifth revision of the fifth architecture.

Like fifth chapters in books are allowed to have 5 subsections... Fifth subsection, fifth chapter. Two fives, no redundancy. Plus, it's a name...

Much like Opteron 240, 242 and 244. Will anyone out there even try to convince me that the second "4" is redundant?... Nope...

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>
February 13, 2004 1:24:08 AM

Presscott is hard to produce.70 million of transistor logic is hard on the yield.

Just to show dad
February 13, 2004 1:51:22 AM

Well, actually it's cuz there was already a P5 before, the P5 architecture.
That's a triple redundancy.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol: 
February 13, 2004 3:00:55 PM

Everything's faster than you.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol: 
February 13, 2004 3:01:49 PM

When you consider that video cards work on the 0.13m process with 125 million transistors, you gotta wonder why Prescott isn't doing as good if not better, no?

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol: 
February 13, 2004 3:12:15 PM

Seen a GPU running over 3 GHz lately ?
;) 

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
February 13, 2004 3:22:48 PM

Quote:
Well, actually it's cuz there was already a P5 before, the P5 architecture.
That's a triple redundancy.

<b>Thank you, Eden! :smile: </b>

The name Redundantium is because there was already a CPU called the "P5" in the past. So when the new "Pentium 5" does come out there will officially be two CPUs from Intel that have had the nickname "P5". Although Pent / 5 is redundant as well, that was actually <i>not</i> the reference that I was making.

Geeze! A whole forum of geeks any only one understands my joke? How depressing. :frown: And here I thought that it would actually get a laugh or two.

Is the tension between Intel and AMD here really so thick that even simple jokes have to be analyzed and critiqued from every possible misconception?

Eden, did you by chance actually get the joke because you use a Macintosh, a Via, a Transmeta computer?


"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 13, 2004 3:33:46 PM

logic gate combination are much more simple on a GPU that on a general purpose MPU.

Just to show dad
February 13, 2004 5:28:02 PM

I got the joke and had a little chuckle.

:smile:

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
February 13, 2004 5:36:58 PM

Well, I'm currently on a MAC at school, but heh, no I don't use them LOL.

[hypocrite]Yes, they're quite knowledgeless, them forum members huh....[/hypocrite]

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol: 
February 13, 2004 5:37:58 PM

Well, they really DO have small pipelines. From what I remember, I don't recall any GPU having 10 stages yet.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol:  <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 02/13/04 02:38 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
February 13, 2004 7:04:10 PM

Quote:
I got the joke and had a little chuckle.

Thank you. :lol: 

So then do you use a computer that isn't Intel or AMD?


"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 13, 2004 7:19:18 PM

Use an AMD at work and an Intel at home. I really can't see me going any other way.

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
February 13, 2004 7:31:47 PM

I use a liquid nitrogen cooled, voltmodded insanely overclocked dual via C3 system, and I didnt get it :( 

But, hey, don't blame me, I'm slow.

(damn this is the fourth time I have to type this, #@$*|& computer keeps rebooting. FUGGER's idea of "stability")

I am severly limited in what my mind can perceive.
February 13, 2004 7:32:19 PM

Quote:
Well, I'm currently on a MAC at school, but heh, no I don't use them LOL.

Oh well, there goes that theory I suppose.

Quote:
[hypocrite]Yes, they're quite knowledgeless, them forum members huh....[/hypocrite]

Ha! You are a dangerous one.

In all seriousness however I am not sure which concerned me more, that no one seemed to get the joke or that everyone seemed to be taking such a silly joke rather seriously. :eek: 

Perhaps I just caught everyone on a bad day?


"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 13, 2004 7:35:27 PM

Quote:
Use an AMD at work and an Intel at home. I really can't see me going any other way.

Well, at least you swing both ways, as it were. :wink: Perhaps that counts for something.


"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 13, 2004 7:45:02 PM

Quote:
I use a liquid nitrogen cooled, voltmodded insanely overclocked dual via C3 system, and I didnt get it :( 

But, hey, don't blame me, I'm slow.

(damn this is the fourth time I have to type this, #@$*|& computer keeps rebooting. FUGGER's idea of "stability")

Hun, you are just plain scary. If only you could use your powers for good. :smile:

On a stranger note, imagine how small and energy efficient a supercomputer comprised of Eden-Ns could be. Of course the question would then be what kind of performance would that supercomputer have?


"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 13, 2004 7:51:22 PM

Quote:
Seen a GPU running over 3 GHz lately ?
;) 


I have, well almost; FUGGER doing his usual magic, I think our prerelease Radeon R420 actually worked at nearly that speed for about 2 milliseconds with a 220V AC voltmod.

Unfortunately, the sparks it emitted set our liquid hydrogen stock on fire creating a huge explostion about the size off the Hindenburg distaster. The fire and explosion destroyed all of our ~86 P4EE chips, roughly one third of intel's total production to date (the other two thirds had already been wasted in our previous overclocking attempts). It also destroyed half a dozen houses in our block and caused a black out in the entire state.

Worst part however, is the damn thing didnt run long enough to finish 3DMark, so we couldnt reclaim our top spot on the ORB.

I am severly limited in what my mind can perceive.
February 13, 2004 7:55:26 PM

>On a stranger note, imagine how small and energy
>efficient a supercomputer comprised of Eden-Ns could be

Eden is slow as hell man; and he doesnt support 64 bit :p 

(hope you get the joke)

I am severly limited in what my mind can perceive.
February 13, 2004 8:17:41 PM

Snif.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over 56 no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol: 
February 13, 2004 8:56:38 PM

Quote:
Well, at least you swing both ways, as it were.


Nope, I'm a straight shooter... so to speak. :wink:

To me both machines are ladies... so I only swing one way. :smile:



<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
February 13, 2004 11:04:10 PM

Quote:

Thank you, Eden!

The name Redundantium is because there was already a CPU called the "P5" in the past. So when the new "Pentium 5" does come out there will officially be two CPUs from Intel that have had the nickname "P5". Although Pent / 5 is redundant as well, that was actually not the reference that I was making.

Erm... Oops, sorry, I was almost sure that you meant the origins of the name "Pentium". I've seen so many people rant on about how "wrong" it is to have Pentium 5s because they're like "5-in-latin" 5s...

Really sorry for that one, DeEvolution.

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>
February 13, 2004 11:07:13 PM

Quote:
If only you could use your powers for good

Are you calling me evil ?

I am severly limited in what my mind can perceive.
!