• 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.

Where is the Pentium 5?

G

galdoes16

Gawd
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
736
Hasn't the 4 been out for like 2+ year's now? Isn't it time for Intel to release the Pentium 5?
 
Pentium D is considered the Pentium 5

They should have drawn the Pentium 5 line when the Prescott came out.
 
acascianelli said:
Pentium D is considered the Pentium 5

They should have drawn the Pentium 5 line when the Prescott came out.
Click to expand...
At first I didn't want to agree because I see it as being very simlilar. Every since the release of the Willamette P4 they have done little patches to it wether it is die shrinks, cache enlargements, or other addons such as hyperthreading, SSE3, EMT64, etc.

But then I thought about the core changes with lengthing the pipeline's stages, as well as all the other stuff with die shrink, cache enlargemtn, SSE3 and hmmm maybe it should have been enough ot justfiy being the P5..
 
I doubt will ever see a Pentium 5. We'll probobly see a new Pentium whenever the Pentium M desktop version comes out. In all reality they should just call it the Pentium 3.3

Pentium 3.0 being the Katmai
Pentium 3.1 being the Coppermines
Pentium 3.2 being the Tualatins

:D
 
Once again, in my opinion, I think that Conroe will be the Pentium V because it will mark the end of Intel's NetBurst architecture.
 
The Doc said:
Once again, in my opinion, I think that Conroe will be the Pentium V because it will mark the end of Intel's NetBurst architecture.
Click to expand...

Don't you think that the whole Pentium numbering scheme is getting old. Not many people call the Athlon 64 a K8.
 
acascianelli said:
Don't you think that the whole Pentium numbering scheme is getting old. Not many people call the Athlon 64 a K8.
Click to expand...

Mabye it is getting old, but it works.
 
SacLANd said:
P5 was tejas. its dead now.
Look for the P6 line.
Click to expand...

P6 was done with the Tualatin. The Pentium M is similar to, but representative of a true P6 core.
 
Yonah is P6 architecture. Pentium M is considered as a lost child. not P3, not P4, but not P6. P6 has all the new goodies like VT, CT, C1E, among other new features yet to be released.
 
I agree with The Doc above. Merom/Conroe (mobile/desktop versions of the same core) are worthy of the Pentium 5 name, but those won't be called "Pentium 5".
 
Back in the day, before dual core go involved, Prescott's successor was supposed to be Tejas. Tejas was to have 2 MB L2 cache, 1200 MHz system bus, and was to be built on the 65 nm process. After Tejas would be the so-called "Pentium 5," a totally new design called Nehalem. Since Nehalem was to be single-core, I would not have been surprised if they did call it the Pentium 5.
 
Josh_B said:
P6 was done with the Tualatin. The Pentium M is similar to, but representative of a true P6 core.
Click to expand...
i think he was talking about hte pentium6, not the p6 core.

2 years? more like 4 or 5
Click to expand...
thats what i was about to say... willamette came out in 2000 IIRC
 
SacLANd said:
Yonah is P6 architecture. Pentium M is considered as a lost child. not P3, not P4, but not P6. P6 has all the new goodies like VT, CT, C1E, among other new features yet to be released.
Click to expand...

Theres a difference between the P5 and P6 microarchitecture and Pentium series processors that have been abrieviated with terms like "P3 and P4". Those are not the names of the processors. P3 and P4 and names like that come from the public. The actual internal names for the Pentium and Pentium Pro cores are P5 and P6.

The Pentium was the 5th generation x86 processor by Intel. Dubbed "P5 Microarchitecture." The Pentium Pro was the 6th and therefore dubbed "P6." All processors after that up through Tualatin are P6 Microarchitecture based processors. Dothan and Banias are as well. Although they have much less in common with the original P6 than Pentium III series processors did.

The Netburst architecture is the 7th generation x86 processor. However it is called "Netburst" for marketting reasons. Had Intel not gone with Netburst and stuck with the prior convention it would have been called the P7 Microarchitecture.

The names P5, P6 and Netburst are completely seperate from the Pentium name. Pentium D is what they chose instead of the Pentium 5 for the dual cores, because Pentium 5 would have been redundant and stupid. The marketting people knew this and went away from it. They talked about going away from Pentium altogether but the public reaction to the name "Digital" didn't go over well so who knows what the next processors will be called?
 
Actually, the Pentium 4 is considered the P4 microarchitecture, and the Pentium M is considered the PM architecture.

http://www.sandpile.org/

Just think about NVIDIA's microarchitectures. They started off with NVxx, then lately they moved to Gxx. With Intel, they just used 8086, 80286, etc. prior to the Pentium's release.
 
xonik said:
Actually, the Pentium 4 is considered the P4 microarchitecture, and the Pentium M is considered the PM architecture.

http://www.sandpile.org/

Just think about NVIDIA's microarchitectures. They started off with NVxx, then lately they moved to Gxx. With Intel, they just used 8086, 80286, etc. prior to the Pentium's release.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't think that is correct. Netburst is the 7th generation x86 processor and is reffered to as the Netburst Microarchitecture. Its never been reffered to as a P4 architecture in that way. Or at least I've never heard of reps calling it that. They've always called it Netburst. It also wouldn't make any sense considering that's a lower number than the P5 and P6.
 
Yes, but surely then you could name the P1 and P2 and P3? Certainly your thoughts make sense, but given how accurate Sandpile is known to be, I have reason to give them some credibility too. And besides, are these reps engineers or marketing folks?

Anyways, it's pretty trivial.
 
i think the op was talking about the marketing name ot the proc. and not the architecture name the processors go by

i mean i along with most people in this forum call a Penitum 4 a P4, no one calls it P7 or netburst and most are in no way talking about the P4 architecture

anyway im not sure why intel decided to not name their next proc the Pentium 5, but like others have said, maybe the Conroe core will be
 
I could draw you a tree on what cpu is based on what, but i wont.
You won't see P5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top