Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (
More info?)
Actually, Intel CPU's can hit over 4 GHz on air cooling and still be
stable (I know from experience). It simply appears that these speeds
are beginning to cause problems (leaking cilicon?) and they need a new
core architecture. I do not remember Intel ever claiming that a Dual
Core would not be a viable way of increasing speed, but I am excited to
see things moving in that direction.
I own both AMD and Intel based computers. Truth is, they both work
extremely well and I love seeing the battle between two companies. The
ultimate winner is the consumer
-----
Nathan McNulty
NoNoBadDog! wrote:
> Intel has announced that it will no longer develop *ANY* P4 core beyond what
> is currently in distribution. Instead, it will reverse itself and instead
> push chips with larger L2 cache and dual cores. For years Intel swore that
> L2 cache and dual core did not offer a viable way to increase speed, but now
> that their engineers cannot get the current architecture to operate at 4GHz
> without cryogenic cooling, they are *NOW* saying that CPU core clock speed
> is *ahem* not what determines how fast a chip is, but are now saying that L2
> cache and dual core are. Keep in mind that in the Intel chip, L1 and L2
> cache are redundant, meaning that the same data that is in L1 is also in L2,
> reducing the overall available information in cache. In the AMD (and all
> other) architecture, the L1 and L2 are exclusive.
>
> We are all witnessing the death of an era here...whether because of a bad
> business model, sheer arrogance, or complacency we are seeing the death of a
> *kung*...basically the P4 is dead, and Intel has nothing ready to maintain
> it's sheer dominance in the marketplace.
>
> Personally, after years as a dedicated Intel type, I am firmly in support
> of AMD64...it is definitely a better piece of hardware in every way, and
> offers
> true 64 bit power today...not the emulation of the current crop of "EMT64"
> wanna be chips.
>
> Intel has a long, bitter battle ahead, and I, for one, do not have the
> confidence in them that I once did. It is truly sad that it has come to
> this, but at least one company (AMD) had the courage and vision to move
> ahead in the market.
>
>
> Bobby
>
> "BAR" <BAR@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:160B260B-E994-4482-B7FA-96E206656BF4@microsoft.com...
>
>>Prescott, hit the streets in the 4th quarter of 2003. The Prescott
>>processor
>>is the code name for a generation of IA-32 processors. It is expected at
>>3.2GHz and will eventually scale up into the 5GHz region.
>>
>>Although based on the NetBurst architecture similar to its Pentium 4
>>predecessors, Prescott nevertheless features a slew of enhancements to its
>>micro-architecture with improved Hyper-Threading Technology, advanced
>>power
>>management, 13 new instructions and larger caches.
>>
>>Intel is fabricating the Prescott on huge 300mm wafers with its cutting
>>edge
>>90-nanometer (90nm) strained silicon process. The 90nm process enables
>>Intel
>>to pack in more cache into Prescott. Prescott double previous Pentium 4
>>cache
>>figures with 16K of L1 and a whopping 1MB of L2 (as a comparison, the
>>current
>>L2 record holder for is AMD's Barton core with only 512K of L2). In order
>>to
>>fit such a large amount of cache into the core, Intel added a 7th copper
>>layer paving the way for >100M transistor counts. The 90nm process also
>>includes certain features which allows for higher clock frequencies and
>>lower
>>voltages in the neighborhood of 1.2V. The larger cache will aid the
>>processor
>>in pre-fetching and storing data close to it for faster processing.
>>
>>Intel Desktop Processor Roadmap
>>In true Intel fashion, Prescott has 13 additional instructions added to
>>improve application areas such as in multimedia and gaming. Dubbed the
>>Prescott New Instructions (PNI), the additions speed up FP to integer
>>conversions, complex arithmetic, video encoding, enable SIMD FP operations
>>in
>>AOS format and thread synchronization. The technology is compatible with
>>existing software written for Intel architecture microprocessors and
>>existing
>>software should continue to run correctly, without modification, on
>>microprocessors that incorporate PNI. Of course, Prescott includes MMX,
>>SSE
>>and SSE2 extensions as well.
>>
>>After its initial release in Northwood, an improved Hyper-Threading
>>Technology is now a mainstay on Prescott's feature list. HT will
>>definitely
>>benefit from the larger caches as well as the new thread synchronization
>>instructions. After its HT lackluster introduction in Northwood, Intel is
>>probably banking on Prescott to show HT's true potential. Perhaps by then,
>>more applications will be optimized to take advantage of this technology.
>>
>>Prescott also includes support for Intel's LaGrande initiative which calls
>>for protected execution, memory and storage. It is believed that LaGrande
>>and
>>Microsoft's Palladium technology will work together to increase the level
>>of
>>computing security. LaGrande would be implemented through processor
>>extensions and it is left to be seen if the initial offering of Prescott
>>will
>>have it enabled.
>>
>>In line with Intel's 865 (Springdale) and 875P (Canterwood) family of
>>chipsets, Prescott debuted on 800 MHz FSB with DualDDR333 and DualDDR400
>>support. Prescott platforms are expected to pack a punch in term of
>>peformance. Following this, Intel is expected to unveil its Tejas
>>processor,
>>the successor to Prescott in 2004.
>>
>>Now all this means nothing to you if the motherboard cannot support it.
>>
>>As with all PC components newer generation items [CPU, RAM, Display Chips
>>etc] are designed to be better faster and cheaper than their predecessors.
>>Don't get too caught up in the hype, just buy what is compatible with your
>>existing hardware or else upgrade.
>>
>>
>>
>>"David B." wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Make sure the board supports Prescott CPU's
>>>
>>>--
>>>________________________________
>>>Vote Quimby
>>>________________________________
>>>"Jack Carlson" <jack@email.com> wrote in message
>>>news:OhzQ7CLvEHA.1404@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>>>I am looking at a P4 processor (478 socket) to go with an Intel board.
>>>>
>>>>What difference does it play for the type of Core and the mobo? The
>>>>Core for
>>>>the processor I am looking at is Prescott. Are they any compatibility
>>>>issues
>>>>I should be aware of with the mobo?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram