64-bit P4 3.2/3.4/3.6Ghz: within a week!!!!

Mephistopheles · Jul 28, 2004

...According to <A HREF="http://www.x86-secret.com" target="_new">http://www.x86-secret.com</A>...

P4 3.8Ghz with EM64T is due to be launched on the first of august?... How hot will it be?...

Edit: <A HREF="http://www.theregister.com/2004/07/30/intel_delays_4ghz_p4/" target="_new">This article</A> actually says there'll be a EM64T-enabled P4 by next week too! Look:

The first 64-bit enabled P4s will ship next week and be sold to workstation vendors. Monday will also see 64-bit Xeon DP processors derived from the same core go on sale.

From what I've seen, there's a whole lineup of P4s with EM64T due for next week. It seems there's the 3.2, 3.4 and 3.6Ghz P4 with the 64-bit extensions functional slated for release next week!

On 1 August, Intel is expected to announce 775-pin P4s with EM64T support - Intel's 64-bit x86 technology. The product-change notice confirms 3.2GHz, 3.4GHz and 3.6GHz availability.

(from <A HREF="http://www.theregister.com/2004/06/04/intel_p4_stepping/" target="_new">here</A>)

You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete - Buckminster Fuller Edited by Mephistopheles on 07/30/04 02:46 PM.

P4Man · Jul 28, 2004

Interesting.. though the more appropriate question might be: how available will it be ?

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

Johanthegnarler · Jul 29, 2004

Broken link. :/

And if it's descently priced.. hmm..

i wont get it.

Where's my dual core cpu's damnit!

<A HREF="http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=277124623" target="_new">http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=277124623</A>
46,510 , movin on up. 48k new goal. Maybe not.. :/

Mephistopheles · Jul 29, 2004

No, it's not a broken link.... it's just that x86-secret.com keeps a small "To Launch-Calendar" on its main page, and there the next 2 things on the "to be launched" category are P4 3.8Ghz w/EM64T (01/08/04) and i925XE (3Q04)...

You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete - Buckminster Fuller

trooper11 · Jul 29, 2004

and will em64t be useful at all?

Mephistopheles · Jul 29, 2004

Isn't it exactly equal to x86-64 for software? It'll be as useful as x86-64, I suppose, once it's debugged...

You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete - Buckminster Fuller

slvr_phoenix · Jul 29, 2004

I've got one here in my shirt pocket. It says that to be a true believer one must first lose all doubt. Only then will the truth be revealed.

Hmm... That sounds suspiciously like circular logic to me.

Oh wait, that's my crucifix. Sorry. The processor is just saying "buzzzzzzzzzz" a lot. I wonder what that means...

"Now I'm steppin' into the twilight zone. This is a madhouse. Feels like being cloned." - Golden Earring, Twilight Zone

<pre>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</pre>

trooper11 · Jul 29, 2004

no its isnt, thats why i made that comment. just look around, i can give you a couple links that talk about things that seem to make em64t nothing more then just something to say. one of those things being that it can only address 36bits while amd64 adresses 40bits. now you may not think that matters, i would think if they really wanted to outdo amd they would equal or adress the complete space. there are many rumors about other deficiencies, especially when trying to use it with linux.

but you see nocona has bene out long enough, why cant anyone review em64t? if its just the same as amd64, why would everyone just decide to not review it, like its a waste of time or something. why all the silence? isnt this suppose to be some big event, intel finally bringing out 64bit? its like someone is afraid to reveal these things, or they simply cant review it becuase something doesnt work... so what is it?

i dont like relying on rumors, i mena come on, the thing is out in the public... where are the facts from personal testing...

slvr_phoenix · Jul 29, 2004

i can give you a couple links that talk about things that seem to make em64t nothing more then just something to say. one of those things being that it can only address 36bits while amd64 adresses 40bits.

My math on this could be wrong (it's been a long day) but unless I'm mistaken a 36-bit address space handles 64GigaBytes. Do you really think that a 64GB limit for the next year is really going to be a problem? Sure, it's no 40-bit 1024GB range, but still... Meaningless unachievable theoretical numbers do not an argument make, especially when that isn't even Intel's high end proc line.

i dont like relying on rumors, i mena come on, the thing is out in the public... where are the facts from personal testing...

Why haven't you tested it then?

<pre>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</pre>

trooper11 · Jul 29, 2004

um but why do less? i know its meaningless, but intel is always abut marketing numbers, wether they mean anyhting or not, so why choose to address less? what was so hard to just do 40bit?

Why haven't you tested it then?

very constructive response, i would have hoped for a bit more useful responces, but i guess thats hard. ill tell you why i havent, is becuase i cant afford to buy a second dual processor system right now. plus i dont buy things that seem to be vieled in secrecy even though being out for anyone to get. why havent you gotten one? lol see how rediculas that sounds?

my question is, why havent review sites touched on it? isnt the release a big deal? or maybe it isnt a big deal and no one cares...

slvr_phoenix · Jul 29, 2004

um but why do less? i know its meaningless, but intel is always abut marketing numbers, wether they mean anyhting or not, so why choose to address less? what was so hard to just do 40bit

What was so hard to just do 64-bit? Neither AMD nor Intel went that far, which to the lamen seems counter-intuitive for a 64-bit processor. The simple reason is probably the right one. No one needs it, so no one implemented it.

very constructive response, i would have hoped for a bit more useful responces, but i guess thats hard.

Actually, it was a pointed response. You haven't done it for the same reasons that no one else has. The hardware is exceedingly rare and expensive and the Windows 64-bit betas that were publicly available at launch time were forced by M$ to only install on AMD platforms. It was a check done specifically by the installer, even though the code should have worked just fine on both platforms.

Besides that however, even now M$ has made 64-bit betas that installed, but no one has made any working PCI Express drivers. That means that they're limited to onboard graphics, which is of course no good for serious benchmarking. Everyone wants 3D benches.

On the Linux side, the few reviewers that tried found out the hard way that the 64-bit flavours of Linux wouldn't install either. The kernel these distros are based on is designed specifically for Opteron as well, or more to the point specifically require IOMMU. (Which is a way for the northbridge to redirect DMA access to memory so that PCI cards can access above 4GB of RAM.) Since the memory controller of the northbridge is built into an Opteron, all Opterons have this. The northbridge used during Nocona testing however does not support IOMMU. Intel did implement a temporary solution (a crappier one where the northbridge copies that memory to below the 4GB limit so that it can be accessed, but this wastes much time) to be done better in a later northbridge if necessary (How many PCI cards would find 4GB a limitation?), but Linux kernels have not yet adapted. So if you can't install 64-bit Windows on Nocona because of a lack of drivers, and you can't install 64-bit Linux on Nocona because the kernel is expecting IOMMU and Intel didn't put it into the northbridge, then how is anyone supposed test Nocona?

plus i dont buy things that seem to be vieled in secrecy even though being out for anyone to get.

This information isn't hidden. Google can do wonders. The hardware is out. The software isn't.

why havent you gotten one? lol see how rediculas that sounds?

And that would be the point, which you obviously missed. It is ridiculous. The whole situation is. It's just as ridiculous as your conspiracies. There's no secret to it. It's just a case of the software not being as ready as the hardware.

As far as 32-bit tests of the hardware go, the best that I've seen (and there really isn't much as everyone is waiting for 64-bit software) is <A HREF="http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=noconaopteron&page=1" target="_new">here</A>.

<pre>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</pre>

Mephistopheles · Jul 30, 2004

Interesting link indeed... comparing the top-of-the-line opteron to the second-to-top-of-the-line is a tad bit unfair (especially considered that there's a price difference, because the 250 Opteron is as expensive as the 3.6Ghz Nocona)... But highly interesting nonetheless...

To sum it all up:
SiSoftSandra CPU Arithmetic: 250 leads (13%); 248 faster by 4%
SiSoftSandra CPU Multimedia: Xeon leads (5% faster than 250)
Memory Latency and Bandwidth (synthetic): Opteron leads.
Adobe Photoshop: Xeon leads (17% faster than 250)
MacroMedia Flash MPEG Import: Xeon leads (25% faster than 250)
Maya: Opteron leads (29% faster than Xeon)
3DSMAX: Xeon leads (6% faster than 250)
WME9: Opteron 15% faster than Xeon.
LAME 3.96: Opteron 13% faster than Xeon.

The Apache tests are a bit doubtful; they probably used nonsensical benchmarking configurations. That's because some weaker setups get better scores than indicated there, and I've been told that that's because these benchmarks don't really represent a real-world situation.

All in all, Xeon doesn't look too behind at all, even more so if you're comparing a model that's 6% slower than the top-of-the-line 3.6Ghz to the top-of-the-line 250@2.4Ghz. Nothing about 64-bit support, though... Noconas are also very hot and dissipate around 110W of power... 😱 The 3.6Ghz isn't even widely available, anyway... Opteron is a more trimmed out option, even if it currently lacks some features that the brand-new Noconas have... Nocona is not finished yet.

You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete - Buckminster Fuller Edited by Mephistopheles on 07/29/04 09:30 PM.

trooper11 · Jul 30, 2004

oh come on, give me a break, you actaully think that its taht hard to switch the tags for amd64 to allow em64t to be used if they were so closely compatible as intel has said countless times.

the fact is, em64t has just enough differnces to make it incompatible, otherwise, making simple tag switches would be nothing, especially on the linux side of things. for windows, im nto suprised, anything they have to change takes years to go through.

plus your idea that pci-e is the hold up would make sense, except that you can run nocona on non pci-e motherbaords, so thats not the problem.

This information isn't hidden. Google can do wonders. The hardware is out. The software isn't.

of course its the software, thats my whole point. im saying that there shouldnt have bene such a huge differnce in the implimentation, not so much that it requires so much work like this. lol i dont know why your trying to make me look like i havent been reading, the fact that i have been reading is why i wonder why the quiet review sites. where is tom's 64bit articles, where is anadtech or any of the big sites. i agree with you, its the software, em64t is not compatible with amd64.

What was so hard to just do 64-bit? Neither AMD nor Intel went that far, which to the lamen seems counter-intuitive for a 64-bit processor. The simple reason is probably the right one. No one needs it, so no one implemented it.

ok you can look at my post, i agree that it is nto an important thing to have, i just would think that the differnce between outfitting 36bit versus 40bit would be negligible, and intle knew fully how amd would be implimenting it probably before any of us did. but ill drop that point, its not worth getting in a fuss over lol

well since i was the one that mentioned the linux problems, im aware of what those problems were, and no matter how you slice it, its em64t's compatibility that caused the delay. hey im not trying to put down intl here, trying to say thier 64bit implimentation is a worse performer or anything, but what i am saying is that intel had made comments prior to this introduction that its 64bit would be compatible with amd64 implimentations. i guess i just dont know what that word means. i thought that meant that only a bit of tweaking would be invovled to make any app already created for amd64 work on em64t.

and come on, intel knew they were releasing this, and this was a big deal, dont you think they would have sent out reviewing hardware AND software , wether it be in beta form or not, for the 64bit additions? intel oculd leverage that, unless they just dont care and are fine with that and dont really care to play up that fact, which does seem to be one thing they are trying. you dont seme them promoting 64bit anything on the xeon. if amd was able ot have some software available soon after luanch, youd think intel could muscle someone into having some beta ready to showcase its new feature. I dont know why you think its just some conspiricy theory thats totally baseless. im just saying its possible, there arent any facts saying otherwise at this point.

As far as 32-bit tests of the hardware go, the best that I've seen (and there really isn't much as everyone is waiting for 64-bit software) is here.

yeha i saw that review way back, since it was, and sitll is, one of the few nocona reviews. in 32bit working it intrenched intel's lead in the areas ti is known for, so it was obviously a success there, although it did not make any headway as far as beating amd at thier own strong areas, it just kept the field as it was before. i wasnt really expecting alot performance wise, i, like alot of ppl were looking for the 64bit edge, so your definitely right about that.

trooper11 · Jul 30, 2004

one thing i forgot to mention. there is software for em64t now. a beta of win64 that is still under NDA on MSDN will run it, but of course the NDA holds anyone from releasing any numbers. couple that with the fact that the chipset is still up in the air as to avialability and the papaer luanch in general, i guess i am asking for too much at this point, i was just hoping for something sooner lol. intel is having a hard enough time getting its 3.4 and 3.6ghz chips in any amount to oems and retailers.

justaguy · Jul 30, 2004

Wow,Silver. First poetry, then these religious, spiritual, and Twilight Zone references. Have you a new woman, or are you smoking those funny cigarettes? Either way, it's refreshing to read something creative.

Athlon XP 1900 (11x200) 42C (Load w/AX-7 & 8cm Tornado) - MSI K7N2 Delta - 2x256 Corsair Value PC3200 - Jaton MX440 @ 370/590 - 80Gb WD 8Mb Cache -

IIB · Jul 30, 2004

I think its very fair sence you cant buy a 3.6 Xeon anywhere...

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled

slvr_phoenix · Jul 30, 2004

No offense trooper11, but while it's clear that you are reading the information, it is also just as clear that you aren't understanding it.

The two x86-64 instruction sets are functionally identical enough that the initial 64-bit beta for Windows would run on Nocona. That wasn't the problem. The problem was that the installer was specifically written to check for an AMD chip before installing. There was no instruction set incompatability preventing even the first beta from running on Nocona.

Furthermore there was no functional difference between the two x86-64 instruction sets that prevented it from running on Linux either. What prevented the proper Linux kernel from running Nocona was not an EMT64 instruction set problem. It wasn't even a CPU problem. It was a northbridge problem in that Intel implemented a solution different from IOMMU to solve the >4GB DMA memory addressing 'problem'. A 'problem' which frankly isn't really a problem at all.

What's more, all of the M$ and Linux experts agree on these things.

And in fact even right now Nocona can run the 64-bit beta of Windows, it just doesn't have the drivers needed to run a proper graphics card. And the Linux kernel can run Nocona as soon as either Intel releases a northbridge with IOMMU or the Linux programmers spend the many long hours to remove the IOMMU dependancy. (Which, Linux programmers being the purists that they are, they may not even do because of the possible problems that doing so could theoretically - but not realisticly - create.)

Again, not a single expert disagrees with any of this, so why are you seeing nonexistent incompatability problems when no expert is saying that there are any?

oh come on, give me a break, you actaully think that its taht hard to switch the tags for amd64 to allow em64t to be used if they were so closely compatible as intel has said countless times.

Considering that Intel implemented the instruction set according to AMD's white papers, the only possible incompatabilities that could arise would be those created by AMD when they didn't follow their own white papers.

and come on, intel knew they were releasing this, and this was a big deal, dont you think they would have sent out reviewing hardware AND software , wether it be in beta form or not, for the 64bit additions?

Again, you prove that you understand nothing. Intel did send out hardware and software for review. This used the onboard graphics and a pre-install of M$'s 64-bit beta. No reviewer wanted to touch a review without good gaming benches. Worse, reviewers only had that hardware while M$'s public 64-bit beta install was hardcoded to install only on an AMD system and they were too cynical to trust the pre-install provided by Intel.

you dont seme them promoting 64bit anything on the xeon.

<sarcasm hat>Right. That's why on their Xeon website they specifically mention "Intel® Extended Memory 64 Technology". It's because Intel isn't promoting it in any way, shape, or form. Yeah.</sarcasm hat>

Seriously though, what does Intel really have to gain from trying to promote Nocona? No released 64-bit Linux distro runs it. No released 64-bit retail Windows OS runs it. So no OS that any business would trust their precious server to runs with Nocona's EMT64. Even if a business got it running on betas, there would be absolutely no support for them because it would be running on betas. So what could Intel possibly gain by pushing the EMT64 aspect of the CPU? No OEM will dare drop that into a server without reliable software, and buisinesses can't buy what OEMs don't sell. Why waste money advertising something that no one can (or should) use yet?

What is important is that it's a fast 32-bit Xeon, and until the software is there that's all that Intel will really benefit from pushing it as.

amd was able ot have some software available soon after luanch, youd think intel could muscle someone into having some beta ready to showcase its new feature.

Again, you miss this little thing called reality. Intel did have M$'s beta pre-installed on the hardware that they sent out for testing. It was lacking PCI Express video card drivers. Intel doesn't write those. M$ doesn't write those. Blame nVidia and ATI for that.

So again, there is no x86-64 instruction set incompatability causing the review delays. It is that the graphics drivers are missing for Windows, and that the Linux kernel is still dependant on a northbridge instruction missing from Intel's chipsets. There's no conspiracy. There's no instruction incompatability. It's just simply a software mess.

"I admit it's kind of eerie, but this proves my chaos theory" - Weird Al Yankovic, Jurassic Park

<pre>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</pre>

slvr_phoenix · Jul 30, 2004

Wow,Silver. First poetry, then these religious, spiritual, and Twilight Zone references. Have you a new woman, or are you smoking those funny cigarettes? Either way, it's refreshing to read something creative.

**ROFL** Same wife. No cigaweed. Just too much coffee (with plenty of sugar) after not having had any caffeine in months combined with my inability to find a way to get two OpenGL contexts running within the same thread in a Python/Qt application without them overwriting each other's orientation matricies, amongst other Really Bad Things®.

Although I suppose you could also add into the equation the power of Winamp, the completion of the rough draft of yet another novel, and maybe even a little deeper spiritual enlightenment than the last time that I was here.

"Don't know what it is. Don't know what it is. Don't know what it is. Don't know what it is. Don't know what it is at aaaaaaaalllllllll." - Weird Al Yankovich - Livin' In The Fridge

Or crack it up to general insanity. Why if I didn't have multiple personality disorder to deal with so many different things going on at the same time I might go sane. :O

<pre>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</pre>

ChipDeath · Jul 30, 2004

the completion of the rough draft of yet another novel

Didn't realise you write! Any particular genre?

I might go sane.

That would be considerably less entertaining...

I firmly believe that you've got to be a little bit mad to stay 'sane' these days 😱

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL/1x512Mb Corsair XMS PC4000 2.5-3-3-7
Sapphire 9800Pro @412/740

Mephistopheles · Jul 30, 2004

Or crack it up to general insanity. Why if I didn't have multiple personality disorder to deal with so many different things going on at the same time I might go sane. :O

Oh no, don't do that... How else are we supposed to have any fun?

You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete - Buckminster Fuller

Mephistopheles · Jul 30, 2004

Erm... there's new info on the main topic of this thread!

Apparently, we'll be seeing 3.2, 3.4 and 3.6Ghz P4s with 64-bit extensions enabled and operational next week. I wonder if it will make benchmarking EM64T vs AMD64 easier, once the linux distros support EM64T better?... it seems that, after this launch, everything is in the programmers' hands.

You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete - Buckminster Fuller

slvr_phoenix · Jul 30, 2004

Didn't realise you write! Any particular genre?

Fantasy and Sci-Fi are my thing. (As if a geek such as me could possibly write anything else?) Maybe one of these days I'll even try to get published.

**ROFL** Yeah. Right. Why try to get published when I can just write more and keep them to myself? Maybe I just like arguing with Word's grammar checker. :\

Let's see, I only have completed rough drafts (or further revisions) for Dark Pawns 1: Descent Into Darkness (fantasy), Dark Pawns 2: Into The Light (fantasy), The Human Imperative (space colonization sci-fi), Hunter Hunted (modern vampire fiction), and Earth On Fire (sci-fi / future fantasy hybrid).

I'm about halfway through several more: Tsara (erotic fantasy), Witch Way Home (fantasy), Vrec Dawn (modern fiction), The Unknown (future detective fiction), and Another Vampire Story (modern vampire fiction).

And then I've started work on a number of others, such as Dark Pawns 3 (fantasy), The God Squad (modern vampire fiction), The Sol Survivors (ancient history cataclysm sci-fi), and my newest upstart The Continued Chronicles of Amber - Beyond The Shadows (too weird to categorize other than to explain as an adventure in tribute to the departed Roger Zelazny's Amber Chronicles).

And I know that I'll have to write Dark Pawns 4 some day because the Dark Pawns series is one of those stories that isn't complete until the whole series ends and DP3 can't possibly be long enough to finish the series. DP4 might not even finish it. :\ I hope to also make a few sequels to Another Vampire Story with titles such as Yet Another Vampire Story and so forth. You know, completely ridiculous titles inspired by Linux program names such as YAST. Oh, and The Human Imperative should have a few sequels as well if I can manage. There's too much potential and crazy character development in that one to just leave it alone. Plus it has my tribute to the tactical battle game of BattleTech in it.

You know, I never actually looked at all of the titles that I've amassed, but if even a quarter of them are any good then I should have no problems getting published. **ROFL** I just have no idea how to get published. The money might be nice though. Computer programming just isn't enough by itself some times. :\

That would be considerably less entertaining... I firmly believe that you've got to be a little bit mad to stay 'sane' these days

Exactly. Sanity is really just a societorial judgement. If everyone went nuts it'd be the 'sane' people that would be considered crazy. And frankly, as dysfunctional as the world is, I think that's already happened anyway. :O

<pre>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</pre>

slvr_phoenix · Jul 30, 2004

Oh no, don't do that... How else are we supposed to have any fun?

Sometimes I wonder how else we're even supposed to cope with life. Insanity is the mind's last resort before oblivion. 😉

Well, that or the use of drugs and/or alchohol to induce insanity-like states. And since I don't believe in harming myself by doing drugs (let other people do it if they don't mind the consequences, but leave me out of it) and can't seem to get myself drunk no matter how hard I try (I like vodka), that just leaves me with insanity. :O

<pre>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</pre>

ChipDeath · Jul 30, 2004

Sci-Fi/Fantasy... Somehow I'm quite unsuprised there! :lol:

Just the sort of stuff I like to read - if you ever want a second opinion on your stuff, I'd be happy to oblige!

I'm forever running out of reading material....

Of course if you'd rather keep them all to yourself, as a personal project type-thing, then 'tis fine.

I would like to do some writing, but I can never think of a storyline that doesn't sound like I'm just ripping off lots of other stuff I've read :frown: ... Ah well, in a few years perhaps...

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL/1x512Mb Corsair XMS PC4000 2.5-3-3-7
Sapphire 9800Pro @412/740

trooper11 · Jul 30, 2004

yeah i guess i didnt understand things...

i really got ahead of myself thinking there could be tests on it so soon, amd did make it so hard for intel to make it compatible as you say they did, it must be amd's fault.

i do understand the stuff i have been reading, i just assuemd too much for intel is all. im am just waitng for the numbers so everyone settle the debate on what works and what doesnt, what performs well and what doesnt. there are enough apps and drivers and such that a person could do a review for the nocona as soon as whatever incomptibility, i know oyu odnt like that word so i apologize, is worked out. since it isnt a problem witht he code, apadting apps shouldnt require too much work, the same goes for the graphics drivers. gratned pci-e wont be fast to appear, but you can use a nocona on an agp based board, so you can avoid that problem.

Intel did send out hardware and software for review. This used the onboard graphics and a pre-install of M$'s 64-bit beta. No reviewer wanted to touch a review without good gaming benches. Worse, reviewers only had that hardware while M$'s public 64-bit beta install was hardcoded to install only on an AMD system and they were too cynical to trust the pre-install provided by Intel.

ohi knew that there was software that was provided, but since no one wanted to use it, your right, it must have been a poor substitute. although there are bencmarks you can run that dont involve the video card at all that i would have liked to see, but maybe its best nto to show any numbers using those pre release situations. i just assumed that the rush to see intel's response to amd would bring out any info that was there, good or bad, from someone. its happened before that soem sites are willing to release numbers even if it may not be the best of situations. but im wiling to give it the benefit of the doubt, and as it seems, intle is pushing its desktop em64t chips very soon, so maybe we wil fianlly get to see some numbers. although, i bet supplies of those will probably be even worse then the noconas.

64-bit P4 3.2/3.4/3.6Ghz: within a week!!!!

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Splendid

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Splendid

Splendid

Distinguished

Distinguished

Splendid

Splendid

Splendid

Distinguished

Share this page