![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Good bye Pentium 4 - Hello Pentium D!
- Thread starter rayman2k2
- Start date
lithium726
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2004
- Messages
- 8,195
i thought for sure that was what htey were gonna call the p-M when they brought it to the desktop.. guess not 
just read this,
Intel did put together some relatively decent demos showcasing the benefits of dual core, the first was a video rendering test. Two systems rendered a single frame, one system was a Pentium 4 3.73EE, the other was a Pentium 4 3.2EE Dual Core. In this particular test, the dual core CPU rendered the scene in 45 seconds, compared to 67 seconds of the single core, higher clocked, Pentium 4 3.73EE.
There was also a demo of OCR software converting images into PDFs, once again using the two Pentium 4 EE processors from above. The dual core processor, despite a lower clock speed, managed to fly through the conversion about twice as quickly as the single core chip.
damn, the 3.2EE Dual core is going to be 1 kickass chip! this will probolly be faster than the FX-55! we will have to see though.
Intel did put together some relatively decent demos showcasing the benefits of dual core, the first was a video rendering test. Two systems rendered a single frame, one system was a Pentium 4 3.73EE, the other was a Pentium 4 3.2EE Dual Core. In this particular test, the dual core CPU rendered the scene in 45 seconds, compared to 67 seconds of the single core, higher clocked, Pentium 4 3.73EE.
There was also a demo of OCR software converting images into PDFs, once again using the two Pentium 4 EE processors from above. The dual core processor, despite a lower clock speed, managed to fly through the conversion about twice as quickly as the single core chip.
damn, the 3.2EE Dual core is going to be 1 kickass chip! this will probolly be faster than the FX-55! we will have to see though.
needmorecarnitine
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2004
- Messages
- 4,609
Redefined said:
On certain tasks, it could be a lot faster than the FX55. On others, it will be slower than the AMD chip
needmorecarnitine said:
i am going to lmfao if this EE chip will pwn all AMD chips. beacuse right now everyone hates the EE. there are to many amd fan-boys. but if the EE pwns all AMD's i will just laugh all day at the amd people for making fun of the EE.
Fact: the money you spend on a Pentium 4 EE (or FX series chip for that matter) can feed a third world country for a week.
I never saw the point in buying one of these chips unless you have insane quantities of cash. They're not that great when it comes to overclocking but they cost like ~$900. I would much rather buy a lower end to midrange chip and OC it to the high end monsters' speeds, save a couple hundred. Oh and by the way, those Dual core chips sound great.
I never saw the point in buying one of these chips unless you have insane quantities of cash. They're not that great when it comes to overclocking but they cost like ~$900. I would much rather buy a lower end to midrange chip and OC it to the high end monsters' speeds, save a couple hundred. Oh and by the way, those Dual core chips sound great.
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
Redefined said:
Why? If the new dual core EE is a good chip people wont make fun of it. People make fun of the current EEs because well...they are a joke. Its like saying your going to laugh at all the ATi !!!!!!s for talking crap about the FX because the 6800 beats the 9800.
The new EE is a new chip, and hence should have no relation to former heckling of the old chip. Just because they carry the same moniker does not make them related to each other in any way.
HighwayAssassins
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2004
- Messages
- 5,210
i agree- and OCing is funner too. I love the feeling of getting the same performance for 500 lessAlowishus said:
but this chip looks SO cool
nytrackstar
Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 651
Redefined said:
It says it right in the article... "Pentium Extreme Edition"
needmorecarnitine
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2004
- Messages
- 4,609
Redefined said:
thats OK because currently lots of us laugh at you and most of your posts...
Redefined said:
Thats not true. You praise it every chance you get and it seems like your friend likes it also.
Certain applications that are capable of using multiple cores/cpus will benefit but they will be in the minority till (and if) the day comes that all cpus are dual core (and even then, it will be several years afterwards till all the new software comes ready to capitalize on those setups). I'm sure that you are aware of AMD's dual core cpus
robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
Redefined said:
You have a great signature.
The EE wont own AMD in gaming. It cant. No games use multiple threads right now, so the Pentium EE will actually perform less in games that the current EE.. Sorry but you need to face the facts dude.
I think this is good news for intel in a couple of years. Same with AMD and their dual cores. I just can't get excited over something that has little use at this point.
Sure would be nice if companies could patch all their games to be multithreaded. Imagine playing the already CPU dependant HL2 on one of these and it actually making use of it!
Slava
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2002
- Messages
- 2,316
That's really nice, but prices probably will be expensive. I think I will wait like a year or two until upgrade. I wonder if they will ever beat 4 ghz mark lol.
rusek said:
Possibly, but I'm not so sure anymore. I think the emphasis over the next couple of years will be on adding more parallelism such as more cores. You'll also see more emphasis on getting the data and the instructions there faster (bus and RAM speeds). However, I'm not convinced that any existing silicon process will scale much past 6 or 8 ghz. At that point you're going to start seeing new materials and fundamental architecture changes.
I'm not saying that *can't* make a somewhat traditional silicon based core run at 10+ghz. I'm just not sure it's cost effective for them as opposed to the parallelism route. You're probably more likely to see quad-core 6ghz processors in 2-4 years than you are to see a 10 ghz core.
Just my nsho
This chip is about as likely to own an FX55 at gaming as I am to buy it. AKA ain't happening. This is a great chip for multitasking, but it will probably not provide any performance increase, other than offloading IO and memory, and at that point, it's still got a rather large clock deficit to make up to even get near the top-end P4's now which are being spanked left and right by the FX55 at gaming. And owning? Wait until AMD comes out with their dual-core chips. We'll see who owns then.
JetUsafMech
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2001
- Messages
- 724
Intel did put together some relatively decent demos showcasing the benefits of dual core, the first was a video rendering test. Two systems rendered a single frame, one system was a Pentium 4 3.73EE, the other was a Pentium 4 3.2EE Dual Core. In this particular test, the dual core CPU rendered the scene in 45 seconds, compared to 67 seconds of the single core, higher clocked, Pentium 4 3.73EE.
There was also a demo of OCR software converting images into PDFs, once again using the two Pentium 4 EE processors from above. The dual core processor, despite a lower clock speed, managed to fly through the conversion about twice as quickly as the single core chip.
Pressler wasn't the only 65nm demo Intel had running, there was also a fully working demo of Jonah/Yonah - the upcoming 65nm dual core successor to Dothan (Pentium M). Given that the chip is up and running Windows now, a release in Q1 2006 shouldn't be too far fetched.
Truland 4S supports Intel's dual independent bus architecture, meaning that each CPU in a two socket configuration will have its own 1066MHz FSB, as opposed to the shared 667MHz FSB that they have to contend for right now. The other interesting feature is its quad channel DDR2-400 support to match up with the added FSB bandwidth.
From Anandtech--
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2362
Sounds promising.
There was also a demo of OCR software converting images into PDFs, once again using the two Pentium 4 EE processors from above. The dual core processor, despite a lower clock speed, managed to fly through the conversion about twice as quickly as the single core chip.
Pressler wasn't the only 65nm demo Intel had running, there was also a fully working demo of Jonah/Yonah - the upcoming 65nm dual core successor to Dothan (Pentium M). Given that the chip is up and running Windows now, a release in Q1 2006 shouldn't be too far fetched.
Truland 4S supports Intel's dual independent bus architecture, meaning that each CPU in a two socket configuration will have its own 1066MHz FSB, as opposed to the shared 667MHz FSB that they have to contend for right now. The other interesting feature is its quad channel DDR2-400 support to match up with the added FSB bandwidth.
From Anandtech--
http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2362
Sounds promising.
TheLonelySwedish
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2004
- Messages
- 281
I think someone said that the higher end chips such as the FX or the EE do not overclock any better than their non premium counterparts and I've got to disagree. I've seen a couple screens of FX 55's at 3.5-6 Ghz (in this forum) and have yet to see any Winchester hit those speeds, regardless of cooling. As for the EE's, you may be right, but then again, it's not like anyone's actually buying them.....
xonik said:
Well, they had availability of the 600 series cpus as soon as they launched them... before the launch in fact. The way they've cut their time table on the smithfield, things must be going smoothly.
I think I'll hold off on the first generation 90 nm dual cores. I don't see how two pasted together prescotts will be that good. I'll wait for the 65 nm version that seems like it was designed to be dual core. Or just get an AMD, whichever is better.
lithium726
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2004
- Messages
- 8,195
no, the FX chips are awesome for overclocking becuase they are speed binned to have hte best silicon and use sSOI to get to 2.6ghz stock.Peach said:
USMC2Hard4U
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2003
- Messages
- 6,157
I happen to think that Intel is making a good move with this step.... These cores are going to be Fast... I like the fact they kept 1MB L2 Cache, for it has alot lower latency then the 2MB counterparts right now.
I am eyeing the extreme Edition. Hopefully its going to rock....
Is their any chance at all... of the Dual Core Athlon FX to have multiple threads per core (sort of like a hyperthreading solution) or is it completley out of the question. Thanks
I am eyeing the extreme Edition. Hopefully its going to rock....
Is their any chance at all... of the Dual Core Athlon FX to have multiple threads per core (sort of like a hyperthreading solution) or is it completley out of the question. Thanks
lithium726
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2004
- Messages
- 8,195
completly out of the question, the only reason HT works on the P4 is beucase of netburst and its inability to completly fill the pipeline with a single thread. since a64 has 3 shorter pipes, it would never work. dual core a64 is going to rock however, as it will completly disregard the one advantage the P4 has had since the C series, HT.USMC2Hard4U said:
(IMO)
That's still up in the air. It's not over 'til it's over.Redefined said:
And being the first to do something is hardly a notable accomplishment. AMD was first to x86-64, but look how worthless that was. With dual-core, I expect similar results at first.
HighwayAssassins
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2004
- Messages
- 5,210
lol.ThomasE66 said:
rayman2k2 said:
Very true. Say what you want about Intel, but other than the original 1ghz PIII fiasco they've been pretty much on the money with regards to announcements and shipping products.
Damn...that just makes me remember when I was drooling over the thought of 1ghz CPU's. How fast things change!
USMC2Hard4U
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2003
- Messages
- 6,157
To this day, the coppermine core is still my favoriteThomasE66 said: