Prescott

The Sandman

Administrator
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
29,139
Intel is releasing the first wave of Prescott CPU's in less than 2 weeks - anyone planning to get one right away?
 

Ksilebo

Spork Fiend
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
122
More than likely not. I can't afford an all new mobo/proc/RAM. One of these days maybe. Filed taxes, maybe I'll use my return for it.

What kind of RAM do I need to get to squeeze the most out of this processor?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Admin
  • #3

The Sandman

Administrator
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
29,139
Right now, I believe DDR400. Later this year though, DDR2 will be out along with PCI express. If possible, it's better to wait until the second half of the year before picking up a new system.
 

Wayne Luke

Tazmanian
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
5,791
More than likely, I will take advantage of the resulting price cuts to other lines made by Intel and AMD to purchase a new PC.

I have no need for the Prescott line personally. I don't need to be on the cutting edge and am not even maxing out my current PC's which all run at 1.8 GHZ or faster. Might buy some more RAM and was thinking of buying my wife a 3.0 GHZ machine which is currently $699.00 so after price cuts should be about $100 less soon. That will be the most expensive computer in my house. Most of my PC's only cost about $400 or less to build. I can't see spending more than that on a processor alone.
 

N9ne

Adherent
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
274
Indeed the P4 prices are going to go down in February, so that would be a good time to buy say a 2.6c or 2.8c, very nicely priced, excellent performance (I've got a 2.8c).
 

Wayne Luke

Tazmanian
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
5,791
N9ne said:
Indeed the P4 prices are going to go down in February, so that would be a good time to buy say a 2.6c or 2.8c, very nicely priced, excellent performance (I've got a 2.8c).
Yeah... I usually get mid-level processors after major price cuts. This way I can spend $300-500 a year and always have a new computer with more power than the previous one. The only things I re-use are the keyboard, mouse and monitors. Usually everything else is new.
 

Mikki

Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
180
Same here...I grab a fair-priced mid-level cpu and overclock the heck out of it...and end up faster than a stock top of the line rig...:D
 

movielad

Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
136
Having just bought a new 3.2Ghz Intel box, I'm not going to splashing out any time soon (probably, in fact, for the next four years!).

Regards,

Martyn
 

Ogden2k

01001111
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
1,116
movielad said:
Having just bought a new 3.2Ghz Intel box, I'm not going to splashing out any time soon (probably, in fact, for the next four years!).

Regards,

Martyn
Same here, except I bought a 3.0. I will probably get a Prescott this Summer. My new mobo can take the new CPU. :D
 

floris

Habitué
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
1,342
I will enjoy them for a review I have to write for online ezine :)

Unfortn. I can't keep them, the hardware has to be returned.
 

The Sandman

Administrator
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
29,139
floris said:
I will enjoy them for a review I have to write for online ezine :)

Unfortn. I can't keep them, the hardware has to be returned.
How do you get a gig like that?
 
A

AWS

Guest
Just bought a Shuttle XPC with a P4 3Ghz.
I will get a Prescot box up. I like to show prospective customers the latest and greatest. The XPC gets a lot of attention by shop browsers so I expect it to be a good seller.
 

Los

I have no home.
Joined
Jan 13, 2004
Messages
216
How fast will the new Prescot chips be going, compared to say the P4 3.2EE?

I've been looking at a new mobo combo... I might take this deal to the bank.
 

Wayne Luke

Tazmanian
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
5,791
The Prescott line is supposed to start at 3.0 Ghz, I believe. Probably would be comparable to the EE chips which really didn't add much performance according the benchmarks I have seen. Since the Prescott has less on-die Cache than the EE, those applications that need it will actually perform slower. Even Intel agrees that the EE will be the higher performing chip and of course it is priced accordingly.

Not only will the original Prescott chips be slower than the EE line but they will use more energy and therefore create more heat than previous Pentium IV chips. The key to the Prescott though is its small die. It uses a 90 nanometer process instead of the 130 nanometer process that the current P4 including the EEs use. This means over time, they can increase the speed of the chip and add new instructions without adding bulk over current offerings. They will definately need to do something about Heat distribution and speed though.

What gets me is Intel's reluctance to jump full force into the 64bit bandwagon and open that market up. At this rate, they will be playing catch-up in the consumer market and are already behind IBM (makers of the G5 processors) and AMD. The 64bit chips already significantly outperform Intel's offerings. So while other chip makers are developing for the future, Intel is extending their current line and allowing their own 64bit technology to languish in the halls of disuse and abandonment.
 

The Sandman

Administrator
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
29,139
Prescott -

The updated Intel NetBurst micro-architecture comes in the form of an 800MHz FSB and a larger L1 data cache of 16KB, up from the 8KB of the Willamette and Northwood cores.

The improved Hyper-Threading technology in Prescott comes in the form of two new Hyper-Threading specific instructions, that are a part of the 13 total new instructions that made it into Prescott.

Prescott will feature a large 1MB L2 cache, and Intel has publicly confirmed this at IDF. The 1MB L2 cache will bring Prescott up to around 100 million transistors, rivaling some of the most complex GPUs in transistor count.

The 90nm process combined with additional enhancements to Intel's manufacturing processes will allow the Prescott core to scale to the 4 - 5GHz range before it will be replaced by Tejas.
 

Wayne Luke

Tazmanian
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
5,791
Los said:
So the itanium chip is still a 32bit chip?
No it is a 64bit chip but it is not marketed to consumer level systems. It is marketed to mini-mainframe and datacenter systems with 8, 16, 32 or more processors. On the other hand the Athlon 64FX and Apple G5 are marketed to consumers. That is where the standards are made and that is where the longterm money is made.

Since Intel is continually pushing their 32 bit architecture, they are actually limiting PC growth. The CPU limits the amount of RAM and Harddrive space you can address natively. Naturally, 64 Bit processors accessing memory at CPU speed with on-die memory controllers are going to be able to do more and access more (terrabytes instead of a paltry 4 gigabytes) than a 32 bit CPU and its controllers.
 

Wayne Luke

Tazmanian
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
5,791
The Sandman said:
The 90nm process combined with additional enhancements to Intel's manufacturing processes will allow the Prescott core to scale to the 4 - 5GHz range before it will be replaced by Tejas.
Yes, I can see that eventually. Upon release, the Prescott will be slower than the current EE chips. This is because of the larger 2MB cache on the EE chips. Intel will release an EE style CPU into the Prescott line probably by the end of the year. That will be when the chip will perform better than its predecessors.

Since you can already run current P4s at 4 GHZ or more with the proper cooling, there isn't much to look forward in the original Prescott chips. Wait until the line stabilizes, proves its worth and has the 2MB on-die cache that allows Hyperthreading to actually perform. Then purchase one.
 

The Sandman

Administrator
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
29,139
While the FX51 is faster than the P4EE 3.2 Pentium in many applications, the Pentium actually has the edge in gaming performance. There will be a non-Prescott P4EE 3.4EE coming out when Prescott debuts. The improvements to the Hyperthreading algorithms with Prescott are supposed to be significant.

To me, one of the biggest reasons for holding off would be to wait for Socket T to replace Socket 478 - it's a higher bandwidth design and will be the dictate Intel CPU upgradeability for the next several years...

By the end of 2004 we should have a Prescott EE 4.0 GHz with Socket T, PCI Express, and DDR2... :cool:
 
Top