Prescott launch...Feb 2nd **Update** Pentium 4 SSE3 "Prescott" Extreme Edition Unlikely

[NFS4]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20031203151532.html

**Update** Pentium 4 SSE3 "Prescott" Extreme Edition Unlikely

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20031205115930.html

 

[Nebor]

I suppose you fancy yourself some kind of.... news... guy. Eh? Eh?!

 

[FishTankX]

I can feel the burn... ooh!

(literally. I'll stay with my 1800+ XP for a while yet, thanks)

 

[FishTankX]

...Holy crap. AMD is gonna have one hella time with that kind of pricing..

 

[DaveSimmons]

Thanks, too bad I'll probably buy my new system before then, a Prescott 3.2 for $278 would be a nice upgrade.

 

[Wingznut]

Intel Prescott processor confronted a number of difficulties on its way to the market. Originally slated to come in the Q2 2003...

That is so not true. I have yet to find a single instance where Intel has said anything other "H2 2003".

Otherwise (before anyone asks )... I cannot comment on anything else in the article.

 

[FishTankX]

...I guess that mean the Athlon64 is on it's way down, then.

 

[1966]

Originally posted by: Nebor
I suppose you fancy yourself some kind of.... news... guy. Eh? Eh?!

He's actualy an Ace Reporter.

 

[us3rnotfound]

I wasn't aware that the Exreme Edition was going to be more expensive and much faster than the Prescott.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: 1966

Originally posted by: Nebor
I suppose you fancy yourself some kind of.... news... guy. Eh? Eh?!

He's actualy an Ace Reporter.

Does that mean that M4H is the Gary Reporter?

 

[dguy6789]

Well, it appears, that the p4 EE is more expensive then the Presscott. But, if that is so, wouldnt the p4 ee have to be faster then the presscott to be profitable, because who would buy a ee if a presscott is cheaper and faster? and if the ee is faster then the presscott, intel is in trouble, because the athlon 64fx beats down the ee no problem, and presscott is slower then that? Come on intel, more competition so the prices go down. I sure hope my prediction is wrong.

 

[jjyiz28]

Intel Pentium 4 SSE3 ?Northwood? 3.40GHz - $417

the heck is that?? so its everything prescott is except a 1MB L2 cache??

 

[randumb]

Wow, that's impressive pricing.

 

[THUGSROOK]

that 2.8A (533) is looking pretty good to me

 

[Chadder007]

Apparently performance is going to not be boosted in the prescott....the EE still takes care of that although its still just the cache making up for it.
After all I had spent to "fix" my intel system I wished that I had went ahead and gone with an AMD64.

 

[Wolfsraider]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Intel Prescott processor confronted a number of difficulties on its way to the market. Originally slated to come in the Q2 2003...

That is so not true. I have yet to find a single instance where Intel has said anything other "H2 2003".

Otherwise (before anyone asks )... I cannot comment on anything else in the article.

wingznut 1 question
the L3 cache

how does it work?
some say it has little benifit.

but i assume it will aid in programs like seti,but can you shed any light on this?

those prices are very nice

thanks NFS4

 

[dguy6789]

it doesnt help much at all, it is a bigger, slower cache. Think of how ram works. Think of the systems ra mas level 2 cache, and the harddrive swapfile as level 3 cache. it doesnt help much.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
it doesnt help much at all, it is a bigger, slower cache. Think of how ram works. Think of the systems ra mas level 2 cache, and the harddrive swapfile as level 3 cache. it doesnt help much.

Your analogy is too flawed.

System Memory has a latency on the order of 10s of nanoseconds.
Harddrives has a latency on the order of 10s of milliseconds.

The difference is 1e6. The difference between L2 and L3 cache is on the order of 1e1.

 

[FishTankX]

I wouldn't say it doesn't help much.

Cache is cache. The cache is still exponentially faster than memory. Heck, the L2 cache of the P4's surpassed the 100GB/s mark a while back. RAM still can't match that.

What the cache does is help Intel make up for the lack of an onboard memory controller, by having to go to memory less (and thus avoiding wasting time with the north bridge), masking the latency of it.

 

[Wolfsraider]

Originally posted by: dexvx

Originally posted by: dguy6789
it doesnt help much at all, it is a bigger, slower cache. Think of how ram works. Think of the systems ra mas level 2 cache, and the harddrive swapfile as level 3 cache. it doesnt help much.

Your analogy is too flawed.

System Memory has a latency on the order of 10s of nanoseconds.
Harddrives has a latency on the order of 10s of milliseconds.

The difference is 1e6. The difference between L2 and L3 cache is on the order of 1e1.

ok but thats greek to me
<---still trying to figure the ram to fsb ratio's augh

say your working on a 1.5 meg file,would it esentially load that in memory and work it from that memory,without hitting the hdd or at least cutting the access?

take seti
most of the parts of seti will fit in the l2 cache,would it then load up the next step in l3???

i guess i'm just lost here

mike

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
that 2.8A (533) is looking pretty good to me

133 fsb sure would be sweet to play with, though no HT... little more $ for a 200 2.8, wonder how flexible the fsbes on the Prescotts will be...

 

[flexy]

Originally posted by: FishTankX
...Holy crap. AMD is gonna have one hella time with that kind of pricing..

reasonable pricing...indeed.....

cant wait for the benches...the point is that the A64 is wayyyyyyyyy out of my price range...i cant and will not shell out $420 or so for a processor.
However, i will follow up what will happen with A64 prices once Prescott is out....there is no way that AMD can hold its horrible A64 pricing for a chip which doesnt even have the OS/Apps to run with.... in the $220 range or so both, prescott and A64 become interesting then....

 

[Acanthus]

is the new EE .13 or .09?

furthermore, is it 1MB L2, and 2MB L3, or 512k L2 and 2MB L3?

Edit: SSE3? improved HT?

 

[Rectalfier]

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
that 2.8A (533) is looking pretty good to me

Man, I was so excited when I read the 2.8A part, up untill part about no HT. But hey Thugs, I can trust you to find us a way to hack it back on.

 

[Duvie]

I could never go back from HT.....In some apps alone it was worth near 400+mhz and that is if the cpu scaled linear which they often don't....In multitasking there were some huge percentages that just can't be met unless a chip has HT...

My questions is how much benefit will we see from SSE3??? It took quite awhil for many apps to get into the SSe2 program...So personally I don't count on that much....

Also I had always heard of improved HT....Now the question ther is there really a rework of HT (optimisation) or does the hT just benefit from the rumored larger l1 and l2 cache....

Last question will the P4 see the boost jumping to 1mb of l2 cache like the northwood did going to 512kb???