• 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.

Interesting article on new processors

M

mytiburon

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
155
From Anandtech



Pentium 4 Extreme Edition processors are now simply named Pentium Extreme Edition. Although these processors are nothing more than best of breed server and desktop cores, they will now have their own product category at least. (This started with the most recent dual core Pentium XE.)
Pentium 4 now only refers to the single core Prescott and upcoming 65nm Cedar Mill cores. Pentium D will refer to Smithfield and 65nm Presler.
All 5x1 processors are now 64-bit enabled.
All 6x2 processors are now VT enabled.
All 6x3 processors are 65nm Cedar Mill (which has VT enabled).
Let's take a look at the upcoming dual core roadmap.

Intel Dual Core Performance Desktop Lineup LGA775

Processor
Speed
L2 Cache
FSB
Launch

Pentium D 950
3.40GHz
2x2MB
800MHz
Q1'06

Pentium D 940
3.20GHz
2x2MB
800MHz
Q1'06

Pentium D 930
3.00GHz
2x2MB
800MHz
Q1'06

Pentium D 920
2.80GHz
2x2MB
800MHz
Q1'06

Pentium D 840
3.20GHz
2x1MB
800MHz
Now

Pentium D 830
3.00GHz
2x1MB
800MHz
Now

Pentium D 820
2.80GHz
2x1MB
800MHz
Now


Aside from the additional cache, also note that the new 9xx series processors are the same 65nm Presler cores mentioned earlier. Presler will in fact be nothing but two Cedar Mill cores sharing the same package, just as Smithfield is only two Prescotts sharing the same core. Shrinking to 65nm frees up a considerable amount of space on the die, so moving to 2MB L2 cache seems logical. Also, all 9xx processors will have EIST enabled, whereas only the 840 and 830 Pentium D processors have EIST. That makes sense for 8xx, as EIST currently just drops the CPU speed to 2.8 GHz; we would hope that the 9xx models will improve the functionality of EIST. EM64T and XD are supported on all upcoming processors. The last final addition to the 9xx line is VT, or Vanderpool Technology.

We have discussed Vanderpool in the past (first in 2003), but it seems like there is still a large amount of confusion regarding the technology. Vanderpool - and AMD's competing technology, "Pacifica" - enable a CPU to run multiple operating systems on a single CPU at the same time. The particular demos that we have seen show four operating systems running on a single machine independent of each other. Unfortunately, this requires BIOS support, Chipset support and Processor support, not to mention OS support. Intel claims that VT will roll out on the 6xx processor line before the end of the year, so we expect 945 and 955 to fully support VT as of now, since the next chipset revision from Intel won't come until Q2'06 (Broadwater).

Intel Single Core Performance Desktop Lineup LGA775

Processor
Speed
L2 Cache
FSB
Launch

Pentium 4 672
3.80GHz
2MB
800MHz
Q4'05

Pentium 4 663
3.60GHz
2MB
800MHz
Q1'06

Pentium 4 662
3.60GHz
2MB
800MHz
Q4'05

Pentium 4 653
3.40GHz
2MB
800MHz
Q1'06

Pentium 4 643
3.20GHz
2MB
800MHz
Q1'06

Pentium 4 633
3.00GHz
2MB
800MHz
Q1'06

Pentium 4 631
3.00GHz
2MB
800MHz
Q1'06

Pentium 4 571
3.80GHz
1MB
800MHz
Soon

Pentium 4 561
3.60GHz
1MB
800MHz
Soon

Pentium 4 551
3.40GHz
1MB
800MHz
Soon

Pentium 4 541
3.20GHz
1MB
800MHz
Soon

Pentium 4 531
3.00GHz
1MB
800MHz
Soon

Pentium 4 521
2.80GHz
1MB
800MHz
Soon


With 13 new performance SKUs in the next year, Intel certainly has its work cut out. The new 5x1 processors are set to launch before the end of this month, although the only real advantage that they have over the existing 5x0 and 5x0J chips is EM64T support. The interesting processors (highlighted in bold) are the upcoming 65nm Cedar Mill cores. Roadmaps hint that Cedar Mill will top out at 95W TDP per core and 3.80GHz is the highest clock on the roadmap. The Pentium 4 551 has a TDP of 84W. The roadmap also reveals that the prices of the 6xx line will cut dramatically mid-August, and VT enabled Prescott 2M (Pentium 4 672 and Pentium 4 662) will retain a premium over their non-VT counterparts.

As we mentioned earlier, two Cedar Mills running at lower clock speeds will compose a Presler dual core processor (Smithfield's replacement). HyperThreading, EIST, XD and EM64T are enabled on all of these new processors. Furthermore, all Cedar Mill chips will also receive VT technology, with the exception of the Pentium 4 631. The Pentium 4 631 and 633 are identical except the absence of VT in the 631. We're not entirely sure why the 631 is even being produced, other than to perhaps fill a niche market. All of the Cedar Mill cores clearly have VT support (as do the Prescott 2M cores), so why Intel would want to deactivate it in one model is anyone's guess.

With both 65nm Presler and 65nm Cedar Mill, the interesting thing to note is how low the FSB clock speeds remain. We had almost expected next generation Pentium processors to ramp up to 1066FSB after the most recent Pentium 4 EE utilized 1066FSB. In fact, Intel relaunched its 925X motherboard lineup (with 925XE) to support the faster bus, and all current generation motherboards make a big deal of supporting 1066FSB. As our tests revealed, 1066FSB did virtually nothing to improve performance on the 3.46EE over 800FSB. The conservative FSB speeds on Presler and Cedar Mill indicate to us that Intel probably did nothing to shorten Prescott's pipeline, although there may be other reasons why they have decided to keep the bus speed low as well.
 
Could someone explain why I'd want Vanderpool (or Pacifica, as it may be in my case)? So I can have XP pro and Linux going at once? Yay?

So damn stupid that they're staying with the 800MHz FSB. We know that the P4 can do a 1.33ghz FSB at least. DDR667 needs to be the next standard IMO.
 
The 9XX series sounds expensive, lol. The single core Cedar Mills look very interesting tho, with 3.8ghz topping out at 95W is insane. Imagine the 3.2-3.4ghz counterparts and their OC potential now that the wattage is less than 100W.

Looks like im going to ditch my 630 for a 64X series chip. I dont get the new numbering system for the single core cedars tho. Whats the diff. between a 631 and 633 and like the 6X2 processors, id ont get it :confused:
 
Dillusion said:
The 9XX series sounds expensive, lol. The single core Cedar Mills look very interesting tho, with 3.8ghz topping out at 95W is insane. Imagine the 3.2-3.4ghz counterparts and their OC potential now that the wattage is less than 100W.

Looks like im going to ditch my 630 for a 64X series chip. I dont get the new numbering system for the single core cedars tho. Whats the diff. between a 631 and 633 and like the 6X2 processors, id ont get it :confused:
Click to expand...


6x2 will be a Prescott with Vanderpool, whatever that's good for. I assume the 6x1 will be a Prescott without it maybe? And 6x3 will be the 65nm Cedar Mills.
 
mytiburon said:
The roadmap also reveals that the prices of the 6xx line will cut dramatically mid-August
Click to expand...
This is the best news in this article IMO. I wonder how much "dramatically" is. Hopefully the 660 and 670 CPU's become affordable as they are the only new Intel CPU's that currently have the power to overtake Athlon64's in gaming.
 
Let's face it: the limits of the CPU are now in sight. In the last year there have been hardly any advancement made in CPU tech (the top CPU's from 2003 are only about 15% slower than today's top end cores). Intel having such a small stepping with their new generation just furthers this arguement. Could this be the beginning of the end for the tech industry?
 
GVX said:
Let's face it: the limits of the CPU are now in sight. In the last year there have been hardly any advancement made in CPU tech (the top CPU's from 2003 are only about 15% slower than today's top end cores). Intel having such a small stepping with their new generation just furthers this arguement. Could this be the beginning of the end for the tech industry?
Click to expand...

No. We've been in slumps before. How long did it take to go from 166mhz to 333mhz cpu speed? Several years right? And looking back, the performance difference really wasnt that big. I think we just got accustomed to the speed race that started when AMD hit 1GHz first. After that we saw amazing things, like Netburst scale to 2ghz a year or two later. I think right now we're sort of in a slump, CPU-wise.

The industry just needs to re-evaluate the resources it has (i.e. high speed memory, fat interconnects, etc) and hopefully something innovative will come out again. The last innovative things we've seen was dual cores. With something like that starting, I can hardly call this the "beginning of the end."

Just remember: The Pentium V
stackfly0ri.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top