Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

pentium 5 anytime soon?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 6, 2002 12:33:22 AM

Is there going to be a Pentium 5 or equivalent anytime soon? will it be competition for AMD's Hammer?

the worst failure is not trying........so go ahead and TRY to overclock your cpu to 5ghz

More about : pentium anytime

August 6, 2002 12:40:15 AM

Not sure what they will call the Prescott Cores....Maybe Pentium 5, maybe Pentium 4......Who knows?
As for competition for Hammer....Why can't the current Cores compete? P4 will hit 3ghz by years end. Then theres a 3.2 Prescott sometime in 2003. Im sure Intel is ready for Hammer.....Theyre releasing chips based on market need now.

This sig runs too hot.
August 6, 2002 2:34:24 AM

simple P4 nortwood with granite bay

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
Related resources
August 6, 2002 4:09:28 AM

If you're talking about Prescott, it's due in 2H03 (was originally rumored for 2Q03, but something apparently changed). In 1H03, it looks like Intel's going to rest on the 3.06GHz Northwood while Hammer reaches M3400+ and beyond...

.09u Hammer is (according to rumor) scheduled to arrive near the middle of 2003, at M4000+. But that's just rumor.

<A HREF="http://skarpsey.dyndns.org/" target="_new">Skarpsey</A><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by kelledin on 08/06/02 00:01 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 6, 2002 4:58:23 AM

Everything is on schedule for Intel to release their 90nm cores next year also.

<font color=blue>By now you're probably wishing you had asked more questions first!</font color=blue>
August 6, 2002 5:13:54 AM

Sorry, should have mentioned that--Prescott is supposed to be Intel's first .09u CPU. Probably why there's so much stall space on Intel's roadmap for 1H03--they're moving to a new process.

<A HREF="http://skarpsey.dyndns.org/" target="_new">Skarpsey</A>
August 6, 2002 5:20:16 AM

there was a L2 0.09 month ago.Also when there is no rumor about it mean that it going good (the inquirer)

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by juin on 08/06/02 01:24 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
August 6, 2002 5:35:18 AM

I recently read a story that the k7 is going to be scaling better then AMD originally thought. I take this to mean that on the 0.09 micron process it achieves better results then they had expected. Wonder what this means for the k8.

Anyone know how well the k8 is supposed to scale?
August 6, 2002 1:03:19 PM

I know the inquirer isn't real reliable, but they had an article with some pics of an Intel Roadmap and it showed Prescott 3.2GHz for Q2 2003. I dunno, maybe they bumped it back, or maybe the inquirer just sucks.

IIRC, NW 3.2GHz w/ MultiThreading will be available Q1-Q2 2003 also.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 7, 2002 8:42:13 PM

It has to be a rumor. When has any company reduced gate width before intel? Never (actually, that's very true). Intel has always done the shrink before anyone else, and then it takes other companies at least a couple months to catch up. AMD seems to be the closest company to Intel's shrink roadmap (as opposed to IBM, who is running realistically nothing on .13 currently). And even after other companies besides Intel reach a new shrink, they produce very little of that chip for a long time (it's a PR thing). So seeing a .09 Hammer before a .09 Prescott, or even one within a month of Prescott is nearly laughable, IMHO. And actually being able to buy one...just forget it :) 

Athlons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games
August 8, 2002 3:30:13 AM

AMD had 0.13m gate lengths on their Palominos and Tbirds IIRC, it allowed them to scale much higher in speeds. So they had 0.13m tech before Intel.

--
The sound of determination is the echo of will...
August 8, 2002 5:31:27 AM

about 1 year delay, in europe AMD 2200+ just got shiping compare that to P3 0.13. 0.09 will be even harder maybe 1.2 year late.why do you think AMD tsmc umc infeneon motorola ............ make deal on micron processe.

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
August 8, 2002 3:46:20 PM

their gates may have been .13, but they were not running .13 micron technology before Intel (and they certainly weren't selling it). Gate width is actually smaller than the "size" of the transistor width. by .13, i mean what the industry means by .13 micron, not what the gate width actually is. I think the average gate width on a .13 p4 is something like 90 nm? Anyone know? So to clear up confusion...Intel has always done shrinks before any other company in the microprocessor industry. AMD released .13 micron technology in mid July in their new Thoroughbred core. Intel's first .13 micron processor was in the 2.0 Ghz p4 (Northwood) - released in January. Their first .13 micron technology was in flash memory, released in October, 01. So...there are the stats.

Athlons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games
August 8, 2002 7:30:58 PM

Just to clear up the confusion. The P3 since the CuMine had a gate width of .13 microns. The gate width is simply the transistor size minus the "notches" of space left between gates. This effectively reduces the size of the gates yet maintains transistor size.
Oh, and BTW, the reason the t-bird and Palominos were able to scale better than the Coppermines was due to the fact that both the T-Bird and Palomino used copper interconnects while the Coppermines stayed with aluminum interconnects.
August 8, 2002 7:35:06 PM

I wish Matisaro was here right now, he knows a good deal in this semidconductor thing.
I never knew the CuMine had 0.13m in it, so why the hell was Intel falsely stating AMD is cheating and using better technology to scale higher, while their CPUs had that before AMD?
Makes no sense.

--
The sound of determination is the echo of will...
August 8, 2002 11:21:58 PM

Because the industry has gotten confused! Argh!!! .13 micron does not mean the gate width length depth whatever is .13 microns in size. It used to be that way, but that changed at .25 where gate width in intel chips was actually .20. AMD and Intel both state on their public websites that .18 and .13 micron processes don't actually refer to actual gate dimensions. Gate width in the CuMines is between .13 & .12 (depending on the speed of the processor), but the size it's categorized under is .18. Will someone back me up on this?

Athlons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games
August 9, 2002 12:10:25 AM

Yes, as I mentioned, the gate width is a total of .13 microns on the P3 coppermines, with .1 micron (roughly) gaps in between. The total transister size becomes .18 micron when you measure it but that's accounting for the actual gate width and the gaps in between.
August 9, 2002 2:39:02 AM

0.18 node have 0.13 gate lenght
0.13 node have 0.09 (intel)0.10(amd) gate lenght

The day i meet a goth queen that tell me Intel suck.I turn in a lemming to fill is need in hardware.
!