Yousuf... others... anybody understand this article about ..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

http://www.anandtech.com/guides/showdoc.html?i=2048

"As the topic suggests, 1066FSB has been added to the Q3 roadmap, but for
only two processors; the 3.46GHz P4EE and the 3.73GHz Prescott Pentium 4."
....
"Not only does the Prescott receive an extra boost in FSB, but Intel has
slated a new increase in cache size for the Pentium 4 (not P4EE) family. The
first new processor (Intel 720) will carry a 2MB L2 cache!"


It then states below in the article...

"You may notice the Intel 720 is listed in the 7xx family of processors and
that these processors all share something in common; Banias or Dothan core.
"

How can a Prescott processor have a Dothan core? Am I getting something
confused or what? It's 3.73 GHz with a Dothan core?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Judd wrote:

> http://www.anandtech.com/guides/showdoc.html?i=2048
>
> "As the topic suggests, 1066FSB has been added to the Q3 roadmap, but for
> only two processors; the 3.46GHz P4EE and the 3.73GHz Prescott Pentium 4."
> ...
> "Not only does the Prescott receive an extra boost in FSB, but Intel has
> slated a new increase in cache size for the Pentium 4 (not P4EE) family. The
> first new processor (Intel 720) will carry a 2MB L2 cache!"
>
>
> It then states below in the article...
>
> "You may notice the Intel 720 is listed in the 7xx family of processors and
> that these processors all share something in common; Banias or Dothan core.
> "
>
> How can a Prescott processor have a Dothan core? Am I getting something
> confused or what? It's 3.73 GHz with a Dothan core?

Yeah, I didn't quite understand that either.

--
Mike Smith

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Judd wrote:
> "You may notice the Intel 720 is listed in the 7xx family of
> processors and that these processors all share something in common;
> Banias or Dothan core. "
>
> How can a Prescott processor have a Dothan core? Am I getting
> something confused or what? It's 3.73 GHz with a Dothan core?

Yeah, you and me both. OMG, what a mess this model numbering system is that
Intel came up with. I thought I could figure it out, but then you see things
like this happen, and then everything just goes out the window.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Yousuf Khan wrote:
> Judd wrote:
>
>>"You may notice the Intel 720 is listed in the 7xx family of
>>processors and that these processors all share something in common;
>>Banias or Dothan core. "
>>
>>How can a Prescott processor have a Dothan core? Am I getting
>>something confused or what? It's 3.73 GHz with a Dothan core?
>
>
> Yeah, you and me both. OMG, what a mess this model numbering system is that
> Intel came up with. I thought I could figure it out, but then you see things
> like this happen, and then everything just goes out the window.
>
> Yousuf Khan
>
>

It's even worse than that. Take a look at the Celeron table. If people
are supposed to understand just one thing, "bigger model number equals
better buy" then everyone wanting the best Celeron will get the 1GHz ULV
model instead of the 1.5GHz model. This model number system is moronic
and designed exclusively to confuse as many people as much as possible.

Alex
--
My words are my own. They represent no other; they belong to no other.
Don't read anything into them or you may be required to compensate me
for violation of copyright. (I do not speak for my employer.)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

>
> It's even worse than that. Take a look at the Celeron table. If people
> are supposed to understand just one thing, "bigger model number equals
> better buy" then everyone wanting the best Celeron will get the 1GHz ULV
> model instead of the 1.5GHz model. This model number system is moronic
> and designed exclusively to confuse as many people as much as possible.
>
> Alex
> --
> My words are my own. They represent no other; they belong to no other.
> Don't read anything into them or you may be required to compensate me
> for violation of copyright. (I do not speak for my employer.)
>


The ULV model is much faster than the 1.5Ghz on a IPC count. remember its
not all MHZ anymore.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips John Llort <jllort@aol.com> wrote:
> > It's even worse than that. Take a look at the Celeron table. If people
> > are supposed to understand just one thing, "bigger model number equals
> > better buy" then everyone wanting the best Celeron will get the 1GHz ULV
> > model instead of the 1.5GHz model. This model number system is moronic
> > and designed exclusively to confuse as many people as much as possible.
>
> The ULV model is much faster than the 1.5Ghz on a IPC count. remember its
> not all MHZ anymore.

Even with the same core? Certainly with the present (Banias) Pentium-M
core, the ULV model has the exact same IPC as the regular non-ULV model.

--
Nate Edel http://www.nkedel.com/

"Elder Party 2004: Cthulhu for President -- this time WE'RE the lesser
evil."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Nate Edel wrote:

> John Llort wrote:
>
>> Alex Johnson wrote:
>>
>>> It's even worse than that. Take a look at the Celeron table.
>>> If people are supposed to understand just one thing, "bigger
>>> model number equals better buy" then everyone wanting the best
>>> Celeron will get the 1GHz ULV model instead of the 1.5GHz
>>> model. This model number system is moronic and designed
>>> exclusively to confuse as many people as much as possible.
>>
>> The ULV model is much faster than the 1.5Ghz on a IPC count.
>> remember its not all MHZ anymore.
>
> Even with the same core? Certainly with the present (Banias)
> Pentium-M core, the ULV model has the exact same IPC as the regular
> non-ULV model.

Nate,

Spell John's name backwards...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Grumble <invalid@kma.eu.org> wrote:
> Nate Edel wrote:
> > John Llort wrote:
> >> The ULV model is much faster than the 1.5Ghz on a IPC count.
> >> remember its not all MHZ anymore.
> >
> > Even with the same core? Certainly with the present (Banias)
> > Pentium-M core, the ULV model has the exact same IPC as the regular
> > non-ULV model.
>
> Spell John's name backwards...

D'oh! *lol* I've been had...

--
Nate Edel http://www.nkedel.com/

"Elder Party 2004: Cthulhu for President -- this time WE'RE the lesser
evil."