- Jul 20, 2001
- 8,896
- 1
- 0
This article, if you will, is my take on the future AMD and Intel have in store for us for future processors.
The present:
As of now, it would seem that AMD has the speed crown, although I am sure all of you know that Intel has been holding back. The overclockability of their Willamette and Tualitin has been phenomenal and only further proves the fact that Intel could boost their processors to the next level but have chosen to withhold and let their Northwood take care of business. This new processor, utilizing a .13-micron architecture, may have increased upon the speed of the Willamette, but the Northwood still cannot compare to AMD?s new 2000+ installment of their Palomino. While it may beat AMD?s new XP in a few tests, the extra cash that comes out of your wallet is hardly worth it. Just recently, Intel raised their Pentium III Tualitin to 1.4GHz and they will raise it again the second half of this year to 1.53GHz, but I doubt this will accomplish much more than to add increased commotion to the marketplace.
As for the budget market, it would again seem AMD has the crown. The new installments; Morgan for Duron, Tualitin for Celeron, have added performance but not price. For some, even, the lower non-palomino Athlons could become the budget-processors. And the upcoming Appaloosa core for Duron seems even more inviting.
The future:
The problems with the current mainstream processor market are abundant. Intel is priced too high, but they still sell. AMD has moved to a new naming system, which seems rather deceiving. Then again, Intel has been eluding the public with their many hertz but long pipeline and less IPC; the reason why AMD is faster. So what will be happening within these upcoming development years?
The processor world is a large ocean, and we have only managed to get our feet wet; some to their ankles. Both AMD and Intel are planning on hitting the 3GHz mark by the end of this year. But is that kind of speed really needed? The current bottleneck for video games is at the peak of the Athlon core?1.4GHz?and most won?t require more for other programs. If you do, its worthwhile to get a dual system; utilizing the SMP Duron, for those on a budget, or the Athlon MP (Palomino core). So why have AMD and Intel chosen to boost the speed up so high? Well, it seems rather strange to me. Intel will be releasing a new core, the Prestonia along with new Itaniums; and AMD, the Thoroughbred, Barton and Hammer. The Prestonia will be on the soon-to-be-more-common .13-micron architecture, as will the Thoroughbred and Barton. The Hammer will be on the .13-micron manufacturing process, but is aimed to hit the .10- or .09-micron stage. All cores will be going to 3GHz by the end of this year, and then beyond by the next. AMD is planning on the 3400 by the end of this year; and Intel, the 3GHz marker. Next year, AMD will be reaching 4000 and beyond, and I?m guessing Intel will be headed for the next big step, 4GHz. But the big question is, how much will they cost and will anyone require this much power? What programs will benefit from such advances in speed? Dual systems seem to cover all the high-tech areas?CAD, video editing, et-cetera?and the Palomino and Willamette and now Northwood seem to provide ample speed to do anything else. And for high-class servers, the new installments for the Pentium III and Itanium should cover that. Gaming is iffy. I don?t see any new games that can benefit from the extra speed. Just beyond the horizon, a 3GHz processor will find nothing but an empty void is how I see it. But whenever something new comes out, it will meet its match. Intel and AMD are running a race too fast for the crowd to keep up with, and I only hope the finish line holds a challenge for them.
-Anik Mukerjee
Respect to my friend Erik Andrews for his help on this.
Edit - Mixed up Coppermine with Tualitin, thanks Rand.
The present:
As of now, it would seem that AMD has the speed crown, although I am sure all of you know that Intel has been holding back. The overclockability of their Willamette and Tualitin has been phenomenal and only further proves the fact that Intel could boost their processors to the next level but have chosen to withhold and let their Northwood take care of business. This new processor, utilizing a .13-micron architecture, may have increased upon the speed of the Willamette, but the Northwood still cannot compare to AMD?s new 2000+ installment of their Palomino. While it may beat AMD?s new XP in a few tests, the extra cash that comes out of your wallet is hardly worth it. Just recently, Intel raised their Pentium III Tualitin to 1.4GHz and they will raise it again the second half of this year to 1.53GHz, but I doubt this will accomplish much more than to add increased commotion to the marketplace.
As for the budget market, it would again seem AMD has the crown. The new installments; Morgan for Duron, Tualitin for Celeron, have added performance but not price. For some, even, the lower non-palomino Athlons could become the budget-processors. And the upcoming Appaloosa core for Duron seems even more inviting.
The future:
The problems with the current mainstream processor market are abundant. Intel is priced too high, but they still sell. AMD has moved to a new naming system, which seems rather deceiving. Then again, Intel has been eluding the public with their many hertz but long pipeline and less IPC; the reason why AMD is faster. So what will be happening within these upcoming development years?
The processor world is a large ocean, and we have only managed to get our feet wet; some to their ankles. Both AMD and Intel are planning on hitting the 3GHz mark by the end of this year. But is that kind of speed really needed? The current bottleneck for video games is at the peak of the Athlon core?1.4GHz?and most won?t require more for other programs. If you do, its worthwhile to get a dual system; utilizing the SMP Duron, for those on a budget, or the Athlon MP (Palomino core). So why have AMD and Intel chosen to boost the speed up so high? Well, it seems rather strange to me. Intel will be releasing a new core, the Prestonia along with new Itaniums; and AMD, the Thoroughbred, Barton and Hammer. The Prestonia will be on the soon-to-be-more-common .13-micron architecture, as will the Thoroughbred and Barton. The Hammer will be on the .13-micron manufacturing process, but is aimed to hit the .10- or .09-micron stage. All cores will be going to 3GHz by the end of this year, and then beyond by the next. AMD is planning on the 3400 by the end of this year; and Intel, the 3GHz marker. Next year, AMD will be reaching 4000 and beyond, and I?m guessing Intel will be headed for the next big step, 4GHz. But the big question is, how much will they cost and will anyone require this much power? What programs will benefit from such advances in speed? Dual systems seem to cover all the high-tech areas?CAD, video editing, et-cetera?and the Palomino and Willamette and now Northwood seem to provide ample speed to do anything else. And for high-class servers, the new installments for the Pentium III and Itanium should cover that. Gaming is iffy. I don?t see any new games that can benefit from the extra speed. Just beyond the horizon, a 3GHz processor will find nothing but an empty void is how I see it. But whenever something new comes out, it will meet its match. Intel and AMD are running a race too fast for the crowd to keep up with, and I only hope the finish line holds a challenge for them.
-Anik Mukerjee
Respect to my friend Erik Andrews for his help on this.
Edit - Mixed up Coppermine with Tualitin, thanks Rand.