Intel Pentium Extreme Edition 955 CPU Impressions

H

Humble_Magii

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
308
Just figured I would post and get some impressions concerning the flurry of reviews of this new CPU and motherboard that is going around?

Anyone else impressed by the fact that Intel still doesn't use an integrated memory controller and can beat the AMD X2 counterpart in some cases? It's an interesting setup I find myself wanting to try it out personally and hearing that it's overclockable to 4+ GHZ with the stock Intel HSF and should be easier than any AMD overclock possible today.

I don't know but I figured I wouldn't be excited about any Intel gear until mid or late 2006.

Ok so what does everyone think so far? Verdict?

I have to give Intel props for sticking to it and actually being semi competitive even though they were and are at a slight disadvantage (memory controller).
 
i use both amd and intel processors, depending on what is the buy of the moment...ive owned built a few pentium 4 boxes along with a couple of athlon 64 boxes...just fyi

the 955 EE itself is a joke imho...the x2 4800+ beats it in most applications that i have seen...even when the 955EE has been overclocked. the 955EE is more expensive...

clear choice...then you also can squeeze some more mhz out of the x2 to make it every more favorable in comparison...

now that being said...i think the lower speed presler's (920D, 930D) will be a great buy at their price and will be able to be overclocked to 4ghz+ pretty easily with the right cooling. that will make them a steal and competetive with the speed of the extreme edition cpu's.

i think it is obvious the best buy today in processors is either the opteron 165 (dual core 1.8 ghz) or the x2 3800+....both can be had for 300-350 and when overclocked give top of the line speed for a mid range price.

an overclocked 820D/830D would probably be the processor to compare, at least it could doing video encoding alright when overclocked...

right now i am torn between a low speed overclocked presler or a opteron 165/x2 3800+ overclocked...

i can get a presler for about half-price when they are available, and since i do no gaming and mostly video encoding i will probably go presler...
 
I agree with you comparing an AMD to an Intel based P4 system and factoring in the price of high and mid end parts Intel is lacking severely.

It does come close though and in the comparisons it looks like AMD doesn't have a huge margin or advantage performance wise though. It's interesting to see how much the on die memory controller really helps compared to Intels?
 
I think the 955EE holds its own in a lot of benchmarks considering its a NetBurst chip. The extra cache helps a lot in gaming benchmarks and when overclocked to 4GHz+ the chip can hold its own against the X2 4800+ in a lot of areas. The 955EE is an awesome chip, and with some decent cooling 4.5GHz+ is not out of reach. AMD may hold the upper hand right now; however for being a chip based on the dated NetBrust architecture The 955EE is a gem in my opinion. I would love to get my hands on one. :cool:
 
it's nobody's fault except intel's that they haven't integrated an on-die memory controller...

the 955x just doesn't offer the performance to meet it's pricetag imho...

it would be awesome if the lower speed presler's were multiplier unlocked...damnit intel

:mad:

fyi i have a brother in law that works @ intel...

even though intel hasn't had the best performing chips for about two years, they haven't even really run over a pebble in the road...it really hasn't hurt them at all...

the future chips based off the pentium m architecture look very promising...that architecture and an on-die memory controller at over 3 ghz dual core...those will be the real deal :D

im just glad amd is still around to provide us with another option :cool:
 
its kinda dissappointing that in most apps its performing about the same as the OLD 3.46EE based on the Gallatin (single w/HT) core.

Now granted if the app is optimized for multithreading it does very well.

But in general (gaming & non optimized apps) its performing about the same as 2 year old chips on 2 year old motherboards. (about the same as my 3.4EE on an Abit IC-7 875mobo)
 
chrisf6969 said:
its kinda dissappointing that in most apps its performing about the same as the OLD 3.46EE based on the Gallatin (single w/HT) core.

Now granted if the app is optimized for multithreading it does very well.

But in general (gaming & non optimized apps) its performing about the same as 2 year old chips on 2 year old motherboards. (about the same as my 3.4EE on an Abit IC-7 875mobo)
Click to expand...

But doesn't that also mean 3.4EE with HT wasn't that bad for a single core Chip? I also liked my IC7-G i875 better than my new Asus A8N SLI.

Donnie27
 
sativaman84 said:
After reading more over at XS I don't think the 955XE is a bad chip at all. Some people over there have gotten it to what almost 5ghz on good air?

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=83602&page=4

Seems pretty impressive reguardless. I put in an order with a connection in China for one so well see.
Click to expand...

I'm going to get one when they come out. This 955EE will be the heart of my new Intel rig. I just noticed that 5GHz was reached with an ES, but the 955EE is unlocked therefore 5GHz may be possible if good enough cooling is used.
 
Humble_Magii said:
Just figured I would post and get some impressions concerning the flurry of reviews of this new CPU and motherboard that is going around?

Anyone else impressed by the fact that Intel still doesn't use an integrated memory controller and can beat the AMD X2 counterpart in some cases? It's an interesting setup I find myself wanting to try it out personally and hearing that it's overclockable to 4+ GHZ with the stock Intel HSF and should be easier than any AMD overclock possible today.

I don't know but I figured I wouldn't be excited about any Intel gear until mid or late 2006.

Ok so what does everyone think so far? Verdict?

I have to give Intel props for sticking to it and actually being semi competitive even though they were and are at a slight disadvantage (memory controller).
Click to expand...

IMHO, most folks want to see what the more affordable none EE models will do. Not many folks in this market segment care about any EE. I (yes just speaking for only me) see EE as a Rip-Off. The Person at Intel who came up with it should be fired!

Memory controller? Maybe Intel should add an Integrated Memory controller and call that or those models the Extreme Edition? I put that on an Intel Survey.

I want to wait for the 950 vs 955 reviews and IMHO, they can leave the AMD processors out of it. I also want to see the Cedar Mill reviews.
 
Asian Dub Foundation said:
intel should just stop making EEs, anybody with a brain would just buy the lower counterparts and OC them
Click to expand...

not everyone uses their noodle...

if they didn't have competition for the athlon fx series it would be like advertising defeat...

an overclocked EE will probably perform similar to an overclocked FX...price will be about the same...etc...so there is competition...it is up to the consumer to decide what they want for whatever reasons...

like i said the only cpu's im interested in right now are the 920/930 presler and x2 3800/dual core opteron...

if i get the hookup on a pressler i will probably go that way...if i don't its amd all the way...

they are pretty much even in video encoding once both have been pushed to the edge...so it's whatever costs less...
 
Asian Dub Foundation said:
intel should just stop making EEs, anybody with a brain would just buy the lower counterparts and OC them
Click to expand...

Yes, same can be said for Intel and AMD Overpriced high end parts. Sorry guys, there are NO good guys here.

Donnie27
 
It's an interesting setup I find myself wanting to try it out personally and hearing that it's overclockable to 4+ GHZ with the stock Intel HSF and should be easier than any AMD overclock possible today.
Click to expand...
Do you mean hitting 4GHz? Well just because an AMD can't do 4GHz doesn't mean it's "slower". AMD CPUs do much much more work per clock which results in the lower clock speed. Heck if you had a 4GHz AMD that'd be like a 7GHz P4. If I built and Intel gaming system it would definatly be a Pentium M, those bitches are VERY fast and very efficent.... for gaming.

:p
 
mikemodano9c said:
not everyone uses their noodle...

if they didn't have competition for the athlon fx series it would be like advertising defeat...

they are pretty much even in video encoding once both have been pushed to the edge...so it's whatever costs less...
Click to expand...

Competition is a two-way street though. If Intel weren't doing as well, 3800+ would still cost over $400. It's not like AMD wouldn't rape you just like Intel would. They tend to balance or cancel eachother out.

Donnie27
 
Intel is fukn up big time and amd is reaping the rewards, heck just last week I read amd plants are in struggle to keep up with the chip demands of the opertons and x2's.
 
Shane said:
Intel is fukn up big time and amd is reaping the rewards, heck just last week I read amd plants are in struggle to keep up with the chip demands of the opertons and x2's.
Click to expand...

Presler and Cedar Mill should be enough to keep Intel fans happy until Conroe and Merom arrive. The only reason why AMD has a superior dual core processor at this stage in the game is because Intel rushed the first generation Pentium D processors. (they even publicly said the first gen Pentium D processors were a rush job).
 
Shane said:
Intel is fukn up big time and amd is reaping the rewards, heck just last week I read amd plants are in struggle to keep up with the chip demands of the opertons and x2's.
Click to expand...

What do you mean Plants? Shouldn't that be Plant? AMD has kept the numbers low to keep the prices up. The other problem is Scale. Or in other words, AMD has a much smaller market to fill than Intel LOL! This really looks bad for the small size of the dual core market. Intel still has 80% of the world's market and rakes in 90% of the money made. Meanwhile, AMD has almost 20% and rakes in 10% of the money made. Reaping what fukn rewards LOL!? Since AMD has to make 20% of the product to gain 10% of the profits they must be Fukn up something.

Donnie27
 
Donnie27 said:
What do you mean Plants? Shouldn't that be Plant? AMD has kept the numbers low to keep the prices up. The other problem is Scale. Or in other words, AMD has a much smaller market to fill than Intel LOL! This really looks bad for the small size of the dual core market. Intel still has 80% of the world's market and rakes in 90% of the money made. Meanwhile, AMD has almost 20% and rakes in 10% of the money made. Reaping what fukn rewards LOL!? Since AMD has to make 20% of the product to gain 10% of the profits they must be Fukn up something.

Donnie27
Click to expand...
That or it shows how effective Intel is as a corporation.
 
Anandtech posted a very extensive review about the 955EE and for the most part it holds its own in gaming against the X2 4800+, as well as in other benchmarks. It performs quite well for a NetBurst chip I must say so myself. If Intel only priced it to match the price of the 4800+ ($750) then Intel would have a winner on their hands.
 
The Doc said:
Anandtech posted a very extensive review about the 955EE and for the most part it holds its own in gaming against the X2 4800+, as well as in other benchmarks. It performs quite well for a NetBurst chip I must say so myself. If Intel only priced it to match the price of the 4800+ ($750) then Intel would have a winner on their hands.
Click to expand...


Honestly I doubt it. Not to many people will spend $750 on a cpu, and those that do buy a FX series chip.

I think Intel has taken a step forward with the 955EE, but it still doesn't have the shock n awe factor. I don't think this chip will bring Intel back on top, you won't be able to find it for a while under $1k. There are just to many great chips out there that can be had for half the cost and perform just as good, if not better.
 
WesM63 said:
Honestly I doubt it. Not to many people will spend $750 on a cpu, and those that do buy a FX series chip.

I think Intel has taken a step forward with the 955EE, but it still doesn't have the shock n awe factor. I don't think this chip will bring Intel back on top, you won't be able to find it for a while under $1k. There are just to many great chips out there that can be had for half the cost and perform just as good, if not better.
Click to expand...

$980 - athlon 64 fx 57
$795 - athlon 64 fx 55

Well almost. Sure there are a few buying AMD-FX but not for $750 LOL!

You right on one part, not many will buy the 955EE but the sales of the 950, 940, 930 and 920 will have no such high priced problems many AMD leaning folks like to point out. The 2 X 2.8GHz model 920 starts at $241 for the record. SO talking about the 955 as if it is the only thing to choose is, well, not very realistic at all. Intel Folks all over this forum could care less about it. Yes, they'll still not buy AMD.

Donnie27
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top