Northwood … Is that It?

[bhc]

I thought we would see much more than just 256kB extra L2 cache, such as fully powered FPU. My impression was that because the die size of P4 (with the 180 nm technology) was getting way too large, Intel had to cut a lot of goodies out. Now that I assume the die size is no longer a big problem, is Intel just holding back with this initial release of its 130 nm technology??

Can Raystonne or any other Intel insiders enlighten us?? Is there a Northwood II coming out some time later??

**Spin all you want, but we the paying consumers will have the final word**

 

[eden]

Nope, that's pretty much it!
Sad ain't it? We waited for so long, yet it doesn't compensate for how much we'd pay for it. It's a nice challenge for AMD on MHZ jump, but other than that once AMD reaches such speeds, they will pretty much toast any P4.

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...

 

[lhgpoobaa]

yep... i was really lookin forward to the improved FPU as well. shame.

when i see the benchmarks its really NOT something to be proud of. sure the 2.2 wins the majority... but not by much, even with the bandwidth of rdram and the 533mhz speed difference.
and then in some benchmarks like linux kernel compilation, the p4 looks very feeble indeed.

so on average, the northwood is in the lead.
but at what cost? and bear in mind it will only be a month or two before the dieshrink of the XP comes along (thouroughbred). intel will really have to crank out the Mhz then!

actually... the athlon/xp design is pretty long legged.
the p3 0.18 micron design died at around 1133Mhz.
the p4 0.18 got to 2000 maybe 2200Mhz, but using a much deeper pipe doing alot less.
and the XP may yet produce another version, with its limit being somewhere in 1800-1900Mhz.
and given what we have seen thus far with the p3 0.18 to 0.13 tully and the p4 0.18 to 0.13 northie, things are lookin good for thouroughie.


The only loyalties i have is to Performance, Cost
Reliability and the Truth.

 

[girish]

when i see the benchmarks its really NOT something to be proud of. sure the 2.2 wins the majority... but not by much, even with the bandwidth of rdram and the 533mhz speed difference.
and then in some benchmarks like linux kernel compilation, the p4 looks very feeble indeed.

so on average, the northwood is in the lead.
but at what cost? and bear in mind it will only be a month or two before the dieshrink of the XP comes along (thouroughbred). intel will really have to crank out the Mhz then!

actually... the athlon/xp design is pretty long legged.
the p3 0.18 micron design died at around 1133Mhz.
the p4 0.18 got to 2000 maybe 2200Mhz, but using a much deeper pipe doing alot less.
and the XP may yet produce another version, with its limit being somewhere in 1800-1900Mhz.
and given what we have seen thus far with the p3 0.18 to 0.13 tully and the p4 0.18 to 0.13 northie, things are lookin good for thouroughie.

And now when you consider the XP2000+ is running just at 1.67 GHz against a 2.2 GHz P4, its again the same equation that used to be earlier, P4 needs to run approx 1.3 times faster to catch up with the Athlon!

Northwood's 512k cache is the only thing that put it ahead although slightly ahead of the Athlon. Now when Athlon Thoroughbred comes with 1] 0.13u manufacture (allowing still higher OCing) and 2] 512k or more cache, and possibly 3] higher FSB, probably 166 MHz (thats 333 DDR) it would be still far ahead of the P4.

Anybody tried running the P4 at 1.67 (I know thats not possible but just imagine) it would have been far behind, among the ranks of 1.2~1.33 GHz Athlons and 1.13~1.2 GHz P3s!

girish

<font color=red>Nothing is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>

 

[Raystonn]

Are you still comparing clock per clock? Well let us go ahead and bring the Alpha processor and the G4 into the mix as well. We can see which processor performs better per clock eh? It would all be just as relevant.

-Raystonn


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

 

[dhlucke]

The fact that it can scale well though will keep the Pentium 4 competitive. For the most part though all Intel did was <b>lower it's costs</b>. I'm just curious how the 133Mhz bus will do on the northwood when that is released. If it's as small a jump in performance as this, I think Intel is in big trouble. That is unless the thoroughbred is a flop.

I'm glad to see Intel take the lead though. It will keep AMD on it's toes.

<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red>

 

[blue_heart]

dear ray, of course it is not fair if we compared ghz to ghz, but unfortunately this is the way where intel and its alliances do......they always say intel is better becuase it is faster and has so and so speed.

we all begun using AMD because of its performance/price comparing to Intel, but when the day come and Intel begin to offer better performance/price than AMD then i belive many users will make the move to Intel, but i suspect in Intel performance/price.

unfortunately NW was really disappointing, as we heard alot but seen nothing, this of course comparing with the AXP not to P4WM, NW with WM seems better.

I believe that you are one of the people who got disappointed from these results, are not you? but we all wish to see better processors from both companies as in the last we will be the users who will gain more performance.

for better comparision i was always seeing the results of NW 2 ghz rather than 2.2 and will see the amd's 2200+ to compare it with NW2.2.

final words, all of us here are users, that means we have no financial prophit from AMD or Intel, but as we are seeing in the life that the big halo of intel is for nothing and many users helping this halo to get bigger but in the fact its for nothing only heat protection and this is what most users here trying to say to others.

wish if there was UnDo in the life

 

[Guest]

>I'm just curious how the 133Mhz bus will do on the
>northwood when that is released

Aces did a pretty good preview of this, if I recall correctly.. no wait, that was of Willamette with a 133 fsb of course.. Indeed, the larger cache of Northwood might take away much of the fsb advantage..

>That is unless the thoroughbred is a flop.

Well.. I dont expect Tbred to be anything else then a die shrink. No larger cache, no SSE2, not even higher fsb's from what I read. Will that make it a flop ? Not in my book. AXP is a great all round performer. Having it run cooler and even faster will make it close to perfect in my book.


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

 

[Ozmowerman]

When the amd beat the 2ghz p4 by 1 fps "it beats the p4" when the northwood beats the amd by 20fps its "Athlon XP 2000+ was within a negligible amount of percentage points of the 2.2GHz"
LOL, what can you say.
Its simple, you can juggle facts around all you like, but the simple fact is, Intel is the speed king.
Amd users remind me of mac and linux users as most of them have this weird type of inferiority complex

 

[blah]

True, true, as always was, AMD is for poor, like me, Intel is for average and above, like me too, hehe...

By the way, don't pay attention to the poor "judgment" of the reviewers, they are driven by their motives, what can you say, they are just poor people looking for the "glory" from the crowd (poor crowd), hehe (sad joke)...

..this is very useful and helpful place for information...

 

[Ozmowerman]

I think we better call the men in white coats for you Mr.

 

[AMD_Man]

When the amd beat the 2ghz p4 by 1 fps "it beats the p4" when the northwood beats the amd by 20fps its "Athlon XP 2000+ was within a negligible amount of percentage points of the 2.2GHz"
LOL, what can you say.
Its simple, you can juggle facts around all you like, but the simple fact is, Intel is the speed king.
Amd users remind me of mac and linux users as most of them have this weird type of inferiority complex

Um, you're obviously only looking at one benchmark! With the Athlon XP 1900+ vs. the 2Ghz Willy, the AXP was winning most benchmarks if only slightly. Then came the Northwood and AXP2000+ and now the Northwood took back the lead again in some benchmarks. The question is: Who pairs a 2.2GHz Northwood and a GeForce3 Ti500 and plays Quake III at 640*480? The Quake III test is simply not a real-world benchmark anymore at 640*480.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor

 

[Ozmowerman]

Fair enough AMD_Man, though i bet you wouldnt of mentioned that if it was the other way round.

 

[74merc]

blah blah blah
Troll with facts and education or at least some sort of formed opinion, Raystonn has begun to show TRUE BIAS, but he loves his work I suppose...
anyways, yea, I was disapointed by the Northwood, it has damn good ALU, the FPU isn't all there, and don't give me that SSE2 bull, most apps I use are already out, there will be no upgrade, certainly not a free upgrade.
I figured I'd buy a Northwood, I'll save my $$ for awhile, I don't need a cooler running Williamette... thats about all it amounts to.
I'm stickin with my PIII for now, the P4 isn't impressive to me, I'm taking a break from my AMD troubleshooting.

----------------------
Independant thought is good.
It won't hurt for long.

 

[Raystonn]

Raystonn has begun to show TRUE BIAS

Where? Is it bias to point at the performance leader and state they are the performance leader? No. Bias means an inability to give an impartial judgement.

-Raystonn


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

 

[mbetea]

ray-
i want to know, don't take this as a flame or insult, etc. but i really would like to hear YOUR thoughts as a fellow computer user and not an intel employee how in your own words justify someone spending $300 more when you could save $300 and get the same performance? that was one thing i read consistantly across all the reviews. everything intel did with/for the NW cut costs almost in half. thanks.

[insert philosophical statement here]

 

[Raystonn]

i really would like to hear YOUR thoughts as a fellow computer user and not an intel employee how in your own words justify someone spending $300 more when you could save $300 and get the same performance?

I would really like to know how you could save $300 and get the same performance. It really is not possible. People are running the 2GHz Northwood at 2.8GHz with air cooling. This processor costs about the same as the 1.67GHz Athlon (XP 2000). Thus, for the price of an Athlon XP 2000, you get a 2.8GHz (or at the very least a 2.67GHz) Pentium 4. I think this is a great deal. How about you?

-Raystonn


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

 

[Guest]

Obviously no one is running Q3 at 640X480 infinity FPS on their 2GHz machines. It gives an idea of CPU performance in this particular game code without the possibility that the graphics card is holding up the scores.

Bitch at Nvidia, and ATI to get there junk up to where the CPU's are, and this old stand by outdated benchmark maybe will disappear. Not that I don't think that those companies haven't been trying to do exactly that.

 

[Crashman]

How about this-the current form of the NW will go to at least 3GHz, AMD refuses to release a 130nm Pally, so until they release a new processor Intel will continue to pull further ahead.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

 

[Amair_sc]

When the amd beat the 2ghz p4 by 1 fps "it beats the p4" when the northwood beats the amd by 20fps its "Athlon XP 2000+ was within a negligible amount of percentage points of the 2.2GHz"

Let me explain this to you in a simple way.

2 cars
1 of them costs 60000$
1 of them costs 40000$

1. If the 40000$ beats the 60k one by .1 second in a 0-100mph of course people are going to cheer and be impressed (if you are into speed).

2. If the 60000$ car beats the 40k one by .5 second in a 0-100mph of course people are going to say (If they are into speed) : "Well you should expect that kind of performance from a car that is 20k more expensive". The smarter people, who realize that they arent going to keep either one of the cars for the rest of their lives will probably say in scenario 2: "20k for a .5 second improvement? I think not."

If both of the cars were almost the same price it would be a whole different story.

AMD + Intel = lower prices for me

 

[Raystonn]

Well how about modifying your analogy and saying that the price difference between the two cars is approximately 6%. (This might be the difference between a car that is $20,000 and one that is $21,000.) Now add to the mix the fact that you can increase the performance of the $21,000 car for free by doing 5 minutes worth of tweaking under the hood. This is the approximate situation with the 2.0GHz Northwood Pentium 4 (the $21,000 car, processor available from Intel for $364 and overclockable by up to 40%) and the 1.67GHz Athlon (XP 2000, the $20,000 car, processor available from AMD for $339.) Which do you get?

-Raystonn


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

 

[ufo_warviper]

I definitely agree that using Quake3 Arena, a mid/late 1999 game to still benchmark new hardware should be outdated. The most hardware demanding game that I actually play might be UT, but there is no way that this 1999 game could have been written to fairly represent optimizations for most recent 2002 hardware.

There is logic behind THG's decision to benchmark games @ 640x480, which has reasonably good clarity, even though it is not used by most gamers. While it remains true that most gamers use 800x600 or 1024x768(sometimes higher), lower resolutions more accurately reflect performance variation among different CPUs.

Let me explain using the same exact logic in the 2 following paragraphs for the sake of rhetoric & direct comparison. Lets also assume Graphics card, memory, motherboard chipset, RAM, & as much else as possible is held constant However, when comparing both Intel & AMD platforms, we all know there is lots of hardware the 2 platforms cannot share in common; therefore, noncommon hardware should be roughly as comparable as possible:

The higher the resolution is increased, the greater the influence by Graphic Card, and the lesser the influence by the CPU. This is not to say CPU does not play a critical role in benchmark performance @ 1600x1200; it does! It is just that the CPU's influence becomes less dominant, while the Graphics Card's influence becomes more dominant at this very high res.

The lower the resolution is decreased, the greater the influence by the CPU, & the lesser the influence by the Graphics card. This is not to say the graphics card does not play a critical role in benchmark performance @ 640x480; it does! It's just that the CPU's influence becomes more dominant, while the Graphics Card's influence becomes less dominant at this lower res.

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!

 

[ufo_warviper]

OOPS! Sorry AMD_MAN, I meant that post to everybody, not directed to you.

BTW, where do people come up with "AMD is for poor people" nonsense. I have an Athlon XP 1500+, Athlon Thunderbird 1333 (Both w/ KT266A Chipset motherboards, and a K6-2 500 @450MHz and I love all 3 systems w/ AMD CPUs! Both AMD & Intel make great CPUs Both Socket A Athlons and comparable P4s are all high-end CPUswill perform well on all of today's applications.

Let me put it like this:
1. Price/Performance junkies like me will point this one out. At a any price range, comparing an Intel & AMD CPU at a given price, the an Athlon XP CPU will almost always have better overall performance than Williamette/Northwood CPUsw/o overclocking any CPUs.

2. At any given MHz rating, or even AMD Model number, Athlon XP CPUs perform overall better than comparable Intel Williamette and Nothwood CPUs w/o overclocking neither AMD nor Intel CPUs.

3. AMD won the 1st 2 categories but Intel currently wins the last. Intel's flagship Northwood 2.2 GHz has a slight lead over the AMD's Flagship Athlon XP 2000+.

Intel fans, please don't be offended by any of the above comments. None of them are directed at you. Not only that, owning a Pentium 4 Northwood has its advantages as well. If you accept nothing less than the current absolute fastest flagship, RDRAM, enhanced CPU thermal protection, & possibly the best overclocking ratios to date, Northwood might be the way for you. For me those slight advantages don't come close to warrenting a $550-600 CPU purchase. Go ahead, call me poor if you want. Spending more than $150 for a CPU is to steep considering the minimal advantage gained. Some of the AXP models can be grabbed for less than that, and you will still have a Palomino with Quantispeed Architecture. If you really want Price/Performance and overclocking potential, grab a Duron 750 for $40-$60!

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!

 

[somerandomguy]

Forget the improved FPU, what the Northwood really needs is a sudden drop in price.

"Ignorance is bliss, but I tend to get screwed over."

 

[Raystonn]

1. Price/Performance junkies like me will point this one out. At a any price range, comparing an Intel & AMD CPU at a given price, the an Athlon XP CPU will almost always have better overall performance than Williamette/Northwood CPUsw/o overclocking any CPUs.

The Pentium 4 2.0A (Northwood) is about the same price as the 1.67GHz Athlon (XP 2000). They perform very close to one another. I would not say the Athlon performs better.

2. At any given MHz rating, or even AMD Model number, Athlon XP CPUs perform overall better than comparable Intel Williamette and Nothwood CPUs w/o overclocking neither AMD nor Intel CPUs.

Clock per clock comparisons are completely invalid and utterly meaningless. The two architectures are entirely different. Not only that, there is no 2GHz or 2.2GHz Athlon available today.

3. AMD won the 1st 2 categories but Intel currently wins the last. Intel's flagship Northwood 2.2 GHz has a slight lead over the AMD's Flagship Athlon XP 2000+.

As I see it, AMD did not win any of your points here.

-Raystonn




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