1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Prescott: 4ghz on air

Discussion in 'Die-hard Overclocking & Case Modifications' started by IronYuppie, Jan 28, 2004.

  1. Emanon75

    Emanon75 Guest

    I wouldn't go so far as to say that it's "confirmed" But it does look like one hell of an overclocker. :D

    There's not much more info available, being that the few guys who have them are under NDA and all.. But If those are the same chips we'll be able to get our grubby little hands on soon, I may just be getting an Intel setup again..

    We shall see.. :D
     
  2. ZioniX

    ZioniX Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,020
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Leadtek WinFast A6600 GT TDH
    Yeah I know. I'm just behaving stupidly. ;)
    I'm eager to see how it deals with an overclocked AMD64 proc which is using 64-bit apps.(I mean both chips are overclocked to max and are using same apps for benchmark... obviously 32-bit version of the apps for Prescott). Then I'll choose but I know it's not gonna be soon that these type of benchmarks results will appear.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2004
  3. IronYuppie

    IronYuppie Guest

    I stand corrected on the air cooling, its a vapochill. GL you are right about that one, that's indeed how it translates.
     
  4. Stang289

    Stang289 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,484
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    XFX Radeon 4890 Crossfire
    something must cause all that heat, but if its 90nm then why is it gettin so freakin hot?
     

  5. BLyarx

    BLyarx Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,983
    Likes Received:
    0
    It needs a better chipset I am thinking the 865 & 875 are kind of aging right now a revision is probably necessary. And we'll see how the BTX form factors can cope with the heat assuming it's still a problem when they are out.
     
  6. highlife840

    highlife840 Guest

    If this chip can do 4 on air, what could it do with a prommie? It will be ample competition for the a64's, which are maxing out so far at 30k 3dmarks(top score). I think a 4.5ghz prescott will beat that. [/B][/QUOTE]


    That is very interesting because My 2500xp runs a 32K fairly consistently now.

    There was something not quite right about the way the new 64's ran to me anyway.

    I think that I will wait until the 64 gains the favour of the masses, and the support of the programmers.

    Or I might go with the prescott once it is no longer in the centre of the new product rollout.
     
  7. IronYuppie

    IronYuppie Guest



    You're not saying you get 32K 3dmarks? You must mean aquamark or else you have the world record, lol.
     
  8. NIB

    NIB Master Guru

    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes i can design a cpu that has 430534mb cache, 53543stages of pipeline and works at 3549564363ghz. But it will be slower than a pocket calculator.

    What do i mean? Frequency means jack. Its useless frequency(cause of the errors in the pipeline). Cache means jack(again cause of the errors in the pipeline "guessing"). Length of pipeline means nothing(if you cant predict with some efficiency at least). I really dont understand intel's architecture department. They are making worse and worse cpus as time passes by. Whats up with that? Its like the cpu architecture is defined by the marketing department so the marketing departments dictates "more ghz, more cache, bigger pipeline so that they idiot john does will fall into our trap thinking our cpu is actually faster while it is actually slower than our last cpu".

    I mean i dont know much about cpu architecture but 1 of the basic things that i know is the the longer the pipeline the more times you will screw up "guessing"(thus you screw your perfomance). Dont the boys in intel know that? Are they only interested into raising the frequency no matter the cost? Maybe i am too just stupid to understand.

    PS Prescott = nvidia's 5800 ultra of the cpu world?
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2004
  9. IronYuppie

    IronYuppie Guest

    No one is saying prescott will be faster because of the new features, it may have enhanced ocing potential. The longer instruction stage is a curse and a blessing, but if the extra cache makes up for it and the longer pipe makes it a much better ocer then it's a good trade-off (btw amd has done the same thing in the past to increase mhz, it's know that a longer pipe gives more leeway for higher clockspeed, both amd and intel know this). That is where prescott could do well in the enthusiast community. You make the calculator analogy, but notice the last years cpu's have gone up in performance as the cache, piplines, and clock freqeuncy has gone up. Your analogy says Intel is making slower cpus, that's not true at all, just look at benches for the last year or two and you'll see.

    This is the very first 90nm main cpu ever to be produced and it's just the first step on this road. You have this idea that frequnecies dont mean "jack" but I can post a lot of stats that shows it does matter for both amd and intel with the current technology. Memory archetecture and the like is very important but freq determines raw power. Saying it doesn't matter is like saying horsepower doesn't matter in a hot rod. You can make the vehicle as light and effcient as possible but power still matters a great deal.
     
  10. NIB

    NIB Master Guru

    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Define better ocer? Do you mean in absolute numbers? Sure the prescott can overclock more ghz than a regular p4c. But how do those extra ghz can be translated into real life perfomance? Surely not as good as a regular's p4c cpu. And sure it will oc cause its 0.9nm. But other than that what can this cpu do? Sure it has sse1646 and i dont know what other close to useless(for most applications at least) extra.

    So define raw power. Frequency means nothing and this have been proved over and over and over again. An amd cpu at 2ghz is way faster than an intel at 2ghz. Obviously things arent that simple and pipeline isnt that only thing to blaim on the intel cpus.

    But here how i see things right now. Intel made a new cpu that performs slightly worse than their old on and it doesnt even support 64bit. Sure that cpu has a long way to go but still. Even if we assume it performs slightly better than their old cpu, try comparing it with amd's 64bit cpus.

    Amd offers you an amazing fast cpu(64 FX) at a decent price actually(when compared to intels EE). Amd offers you a really good perfomer(64) at a very competitive price(200$). Both of these cpus are able to beat on most applications current intel cpus. Thus they are able to beat prescott too. And whats even better is that amd's cpus are 64bit. What does that mean? Give them a proper os and a proper application and watch them skyrocketing. Some say that 64bit is almost useless for home users.

    Even if this is the case(which i personally dont think it is), amd has faster cpus. Amd has low end market(athlon 2500+ is damn cheap and damn fast), amd has mid end market(athlon 64), amd has high end market(64fx). And intel comes out with prescott? Rofl.

    I have a very strong feeling that intel will change prescotts a lot in the follow months(they will even change socket). Its like what they did with p4s. First crappy p4as came out who were slower than snails. Then semicrappy p4bs came out which balanced the things with their equivalent athlons, and then p4cs came out and beat the crap out of athlon cpus. But will the history repeat itself? Also notice that time is on amd's time since 64bit windows are coming out and more 64bit applications(for windows) will come out too. Intel said that their future prescotts will probably have 64bit modules. But amd is offering 64bit now and whats more, amd is offering 64bit and higher perfomance now, so why wait?

    Sorry but i feel that intel lost this round as loudly as nvidia lost from ati. Maybe nvidia will make a comeback. Maybe intel will make a comeback. But lets drop the "maybe"s and concetrate on now and now both amd and ati are a better choice.

    PS I have intel and nvidia so go figure :D.
     

  11. IronYuppie

    IronYuppie Guest



    Yes I mean in absolute numbers. Look around a bit and read the review at anand or many other places saying prescott SCALES BETTER than northwood. Once an E hits 3.6 or so it starts to be faster clock for clock than NW. It also has potential to reach higher absolute mhz as well due to larger pipe. So a 4.0E is roughly equiv to 4.2NW. Yes, surely better than a "regular p4c" :D .



    A couple things: one, of course freq matters, it's not the sole factor but it is a big one. If not why is a 2.2 amd faster than a 2.0 amd? You're comparing two different designs (amd and intel) and saying because Intel focus on raw power more than amd that power doesn't matter. But with a given design, higher clocks usually means higher performance. Looking at Intel and saying so many things is wrong is BS, they're the leaders in chip fab, the first to go 90nm, AMD is a step behind in tech.

    BTW, looking at the mid range market a 2ghz amd is not much if at all faster than a 2.4c. A 2.4c competes fine with an xp3200 and even with xp64 3000.

    And of course the dirty little secret of amd is they get owned badly in almost anything but games when matched up against competing intels. There's a lot more to computing than games (what amd fanboys refuse to acknowledge), the main reason I'm running Intel right now.

    Prescott is cheaper and a brand new process that will be dominant for a few years. AMD will take the same step, Intel is the leader here in that process.
    Prescott also doesn't perform worse if you're an ocer. Plus dont forget about the hidden 64 extensions in prescott, that will be a nice surprise.

    Unfortunately about 97% of the market see's 64bit as useless right now, not for enthusiasts, 64 sales have been good in that sector, but it's won over almost zero oem's. It's a climate where there's not a single thing to take advantage of the 64bit cpu, by the time it's mainstream all the chips people are buying now will be obsolete. The $211 amd 64 3000 doesn't comparible Intels in price, especially when it comes to ocing anything from a 2.4C to 3.4EE can compete or own it in most apps.


    Back to the dirty little secret, amd gets owned in most non 3d apps and that is huge, amd people only ever focus on 3d and that's a mistake. The hardcore enthusiast gamer is less than 5% of the market. 2500 is damn cheap, the 2.4c is almost as damn cheap and a way better chip. AMD does have the performance crown by maybe 1-2% over the EE, but the EE is a much better chip in many ways and is an ocing marvel. That's why it's still on the front pages of the marks (1st in aqua and mark03, 2nd in mark01). If I had the money I'd spend the extra $200 on an EE and a prommy and smoke most fx-51's.

    One reason to wait is for all those people that have C's, no reason at all to upgrade. Windows 64 is reportedly 14 months off at least, so I dont know what you mean by the timing being good for amd when it's almost useless to buy one now due to lack of support. I plan to get the best of both worlds, wait and see who has the best 64 cpu when longhorn is on the shelves, Tejas will likely be king be then.

    Also prescott has 64 bit extension built in supposedly. Time is not on amd's side. Do you know they lost half their market share in the last year and stand at 7-8%, compared to 14% in 02? They have already missed a big window to get oems on board, yet all the big companies are touting the EE as the top cpu.

    Intel make a comback? rofl! AMD is only at 7% share and intel is over 80%, lol! ATI went from low 20% to around 24-26% and took over 2nd (after intel) that's a few percent. Amd would have to increase sales about 800% to take the lead, lol. That would be equivalent to saying "with the new G5's mac is in the lead, when will PC's come back?" Earth to amd dudes!
     
  12. NIB

    NIB Master Guru

    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting. And any logical explaination why prescott benefits more from higher frequency than northwood? Does it have to do with the cache+pipeline combination? But shouldnt shorter pipeline(nw) be faster clock for clock? And what about temperature. Also prescotts runs a lot hotter than p4c. So can they(current models) go higher than northwood? And if they can, can they go high enough to compete(perfomance wise) with athlon 64 or even northwood?

    Yes so? I didnt say that frequency is totally irrelevant to perfomance. I am saying that frequency alone means nothing.
    Only 1 word, ROFL :p(yes i dont know how to count).
    Unless you do very specific tasks in your workstation, games is the only place that you need perfomance. You can use word, excel and write programs even at a p2. Where you need cutting edge(or at least mid perfomance) is on games. All i see useful about intel cpus is the faster encoding they can do but then again i am not interested in that either.
    This reminds me when ati replaced 9500 pro with 9600 pro. Every1 said that even though 9600pro is slower, it costs less to be produced thus it will be cheaper. 9600 pro cost the same with 9500 pro but the thing is that ati replaced all 9500 pro and stopped producing them so you couldnt find a 9500 pro even though it cost the same with 9600 pro and performed better.

    So cheaper production doesnt mean that this will affect buyers.
    Yup dont forget dx 9.1, forceware 60+, ps3.0, etc. Do those things remind of something? :D
    Forget about 64bit. Lets assume its useless. What about current perfomance on apps now. Athlon 64 are faster and on some occasions cheaper than p4c. Oh i forgot, perfomance on games doesnt matter, silly me.
    Yup whatever. I really need that prescot at 4ghz to run MS word fast.
    Sorry i dont consider myself an average john doe that buys dell. I am talking about a comeback on the enthousiasts market.
    I never had an amd cpu you idiot.

    So to sum up. Prescott will oc better in terms of absolute numbers compared to northwood cause of longer pipeline and 0.9nm(which supposingly help it keep the temperatures lower). Current editions of prescott performs worse than athlon 64 where perfomance counts the most, games. Also notice that currently 64bit amd cpus are on crappy boards, need registered memories and have other problems. Thats why i cant suggest them to some1. But intel's answer is worse than i expected. They cant even beat their current cpus for crying our loud. Plz do not support current form of prescott cause it simply sucks.

    If intel makes an improved edition(which i am sure they will), then we can talk again. But right now prescott simply doesnt worth. Its almost as bad as a p4a with sdram was compared to athlon of that time. I still remember intel fans supporting that crap, saying how ownage p4a was.

    PS Dont even dare mentioning p4 EE. With that ammount of money you can get dual 64FX and i doubt that combo will be slower than p4 EE. P4 EE is just a joke.
    PS2 Quoted from anand " If you find yourself using Microsoft Office for most of your tasks and if you’re a gamer the decision is clear: the Athlon 64 is for you. The Pentium 4 continues to hold advantages in content creation applications, 3D rendering and media encoding". I rest my case.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2004
  13. highlife840

    highlife840 Guest


    That is very interesting because My 2500xp runs a 32K fairly consistently now.

    There was something not quite right about the way the new 64's ran to me anyway.

    I think that I will wait until the 64 gains the favour of the masses, and the support of the programmers.

    Or I might go with the prescott once it is no longer in the centre of the new product rollout. [/B][/QUOTE]

    Very right I have to apologize good nugs make it hard to read at times and you are right aquamark is what I run 32k at not 3dmark03, my bad.
     
  14. IronYuppie

    IronYuppie Guest

    NIB, you've revealed yourself to be a flamer so you're going on my ignore list. This is a hardware forum and you have to resort to calling names, I guess due to lack of anything better to do combat with. Guru3d has made it clear this isn't the place for that kind of behavior. People like you get threads locked all the time and ruin things for everyone.
     
  15. G L

    G L Don Juan

    Messages:
    10,261
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Leadtek 8800 GTS 640 MB 600/1000
    Its not really true that the Prescott is a bad chip. The negativity surrounding it is because it isn't an inherently better performing chip then what came before it. But that's no big sin. The Palomino was hardly better then the Thunderbird, and the Thoroughbred wasn't better at all then the Palomino. People feel like doubling the cache without increasing performance is some huge failure, but as long as Intel charges the same price scale then it really isn't. If Intel wanted to have a 50-stage pipeline and put 5 MB cache onboard to make up for it, that's their perogative, what difference does it make to us? Its rather like AMD doubling the cache with the Barton but then upping the PR points to compensate. Getting a tbred or barton 2600+ is really just pretty much the same thing.

    I'm still not so sure the Prescott will be a good OCer, that report withstanding. For instance:

    "We are not going to share any overclocking results until we get retail CPUs from the channel to test. From what we have seen though, the current Prescott core that we have is in no way shape or form an enthusiast CPU. In fact, I would suggest that the enthusiast stay far away from the Prescott at this point in time. As we get more experience with retail CPUs that we currently have on order, we will certainly let you know."

    http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTgzLDY=

    Intel didn't even release a Prescott 3.4 GHz with the rest of them. Now why is that? I could see cooling being the issue, but surely they will not be able to get a substantially cooler prescott core out anytime soon. Of course, I'm not going to turn around and say the guy who got 4 GHz on air is a liar, but he many also have an exception air cooling system or be very lucky.

    The Athlon 64 is in reasonably good shape. Only the FX requires registered RAM, and its hardly any more expensive anyway. The 3x00+ line motherboards have a few RAM issues, but nothing fatal. Overclocking capabilities are dissapointing though, so in that respect they have a ways to go.
     

  16. NIB

    NIB Master Guru

    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am sure you mean aquamark and not 3dmark 2001. 2 different benchmarks, 2 different scales. I doubt you would score any higher than 13k on 3dmark 2001.
    Its you that called me a fanboy first. Let me remind you
    In any case, if you dont want to reply to my arguements, feel free not to. Btw, anand's review conclusion of prescott totally represents my opinion. The only thing they say is that since prescott will be able to hit higher frequencies with ease(frequencies that northwood cant hit), it will eventually outperform northwood, but for now northwood and amd's cpus are a better choice.
    Larger cache with bigger latency. Bigger isnt always faster. In case, current prescotts are a disapointment for me. Future prescotts(with a lot higher frequency and maybe with 64bit extensions and couple more tweeks), could be a viable buyer's choice.
    Well, always remember that this isnt final production peices. Its a common fact that as time passes by the production method is perfected thus better quality cpus come out that overclock better. Overclocking on early production unlocked cpus is almost always, pretty bad. So be patient.
     
  17. G L

    G L Don Juan

    Messages:
    10,261
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Leadtek 8800 GTS 640 MB 600/1000
    Except when it is. Something Intel added allows the Prescott to attain similar performance of a northwood with 11 less stages. But that isn't the point. The point is that there is no shame in Intel adding as many stages as they like, as long as they put enough else in the chip to make up for it. If they extended the pipeline with absolutely no other improvements, then turned around and charged $600 for the Prescott 3.6 GHz because its "faster" then we'd have a valid complaint. But that's not what they did. Fact of the matter is that Intel really didn't hype the Prescott up very much, the hardware community pretty just did that on their own based on the 1 MB cache and memories of what happened when the cache was doubled the time before. But I don't think Intel ever said the Prescott would be substantially better performing then Northwoods at the same frequency.

    I realize that... many people are saying the Prescott will be a good OCer right now upon release, which once upon a time was the point of this thread.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2004
  18. IronYuppie

    IronYuppie Guest

    First of all, you're mixing my quotes in with others, that first quote is from someone else and I already pointed out they must be mistaken. BTW, I hit around 19k on 01 and 48K on aquamark.

    I and GL have already explained where you're lacking in knowledge and mistaken about a few things. You keep repeating the same things from anand over and over again. If you kept up on technology better you'd know they had a sample chip and the retail ones are running much cooler. That's what's given you the erroneous idea they're poor ocers. You're making judgements based on one review of one sample chip and that review happens to be wrong. I'm not going to waste any more time revealing your ignorance, the last several posts have already achieved that.

    Lastly, there was no need to call me an idiot. That's just uneccesary and not cool at this forum. Go over to the gamespot forums and you'll find more people matching your maturity level and you can have all the flame wars you want. I can hear it now "intel is teh suxxors" "No amd is teh sux." You'll fit in great!
     
  19. funkymonkey

    funkymonkey Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,522
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    GF 6600GT/ 6800GT went for RMA
    hum.........
    I wonder what it will do on my watercooling...
    Really itchy to grap 2.8E but i think i will not buy it this time.
    I dont wana use money saved for my next big upgrade.
     
  20. NIB

    NIB Master Guru

    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with you. But why are you so defending against intel? Cause they managed to make a cpu that is slightly slower than current one? And that in the future it will manage to be faster? We are talking about now. And on the "now" time section, prescotts dont look any good(IMO which is nothing since i dont have personal experience).

    My answer was about a guy with a 5700 not you. Who said that he scored like 30k(on 3dmark).

    Maybe if you read my post, you would see that i write the same thing.

    Do you have a prescott cpu? I doubt. Neither i have a prescott. So the only opinion i can have is by reading hardware reviews sites. Anand is 1 of them.

    My mistake, i wasnt borned with all knowing the cpu architecture. 1 of the reasons that i read forums is so that i can learn things.

    There was no need for you calling me a fanboy either.

    Have fun and relax.
     

Share This Page