New Pentium 4s unveiled

[MarineCorps]

Intel introduced a new class of Pentium chip on Sunday - with twice as much secondary cache as current models and power-saving technology borrowed from its notebook line




Intel introduced a line of Pentium 4 desktop chips on Sunday in the US that contain 2MB of secondary cache, twice as much as current Pentium 4s, as well as technology from its notebook line that's designed to cut power consumption. Larger caches, a pool of memory located on the processor, generally improve performance.

The four chips included in the new 600 series of Pentium 4s range in speeds from 3GHz to 3.6GHz, and all of them feature an 800MHz bus. The top-of-the-line 660 Pentium 4 sells for $605 in quantities of 1,000, while the 630 sells for $224.

The chipmaker also unveiled another member of the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition processor family, which runs at 3.73GHz and contains a 1.066GHz bus.

The new chips in some ways can be seen as some of the last of their kind. Starting in the second quarter, Intel will begin to sell dual-core processors.

Rival AMD has said it will come out with dual-core chips in the summer and deliver a new family of energy-efficient notebook chips called Turion.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/chips/0,39020354,39188612,00.htm

Intresting.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

Anyone know if these dual-processers won't make soooo much heat?

 

[Zakharov]

Anyone know if these dual-processers won't make soooo much heat?

Yes they will which is why they will be clocked lower than single core cpus. It's my understanding that the temperature barrier is the main reason for the switch to dual core technology.

Instead of one 3.6GHz core you will probably see a pair of cores at something like 2GHz each. This will give the effective performance of a 4GHz single core but will produce less heat. However, until the release of an OS that utilises both cores it is unlikely that there will be much of a performance increase.

As for these new 2MB level 2 cache Intel cpus, I think they would be better off increasing the amount of level 1 cache instead if they want to compete with the A64.

 

[MarineCorps]

As for these new 2MB level 2 cache Intel cpus, I think they would be better off increasing the amount of level 1 cache instead if they want to compete with the A64.

Whats the difference between level one and level two cache?

 

[Jamesds]

isn't level 2 cache a step up from level 1 cache?

 

[Zakharov]

HERE is a nice article explaining how the different cache levels work.

The extra L1 cache on AMD cpus is one reason why they are better performers in games, as they need to repeatedly make the same calculations over and over again, (calculating the AI of a NPC for example). The L1 cache allows this to be done much quicker than if the data was coming from the L2 cache.

The extra L2 cache in Intel cpus is useful for media encoding and professional apps because the type of calculation required constantly. The variety of data required can be accessed quicker by storing it all in the large L2 cache instead of having to refer to the system RAM. L1 cache is not large enough to store all the data, so there is no need to have too much of it.

My comment was made from a gamer's perspective, so please don't take it as a generalisation. Intel are aiming their products at a different market which requires a different chip design. There is probably more money to be made from designing cpus for professional apps anyway, which is why Intel has designed their chips the way they have. As consumers we should be happy that there is a choice, allowing us to pick the cpu that best fits our computing needs.

 

[MarineCorps]

HERE is a nice article explaining how the different cache levels work.

The extra L1 cache on AMD cpus is one reason why they are better performers in games, as they need to repeatedly make the same calculations over and over again, (calculating the AI of a NPC for example). The L1 cache allows this to be done much quicker than if the data was coming from the L2 cache.

The extra L2 cache in Intel cpus is useful for media encoding and professional apps because the type of calculation required constantly. The variety of data required can be accessed quicker by storing it all in the large L2 cache instead of having to refer to the system RAM. L1 cache is not large enough to store all the data, so there is no need to have too much of it.

My comment was made from a gamer's perspective, so please don't take it as a generalisation. Intel are aiming their products at a different market which requires a different chip design. There is probably more money to be made from designing cpus for professional apps anyway, which is why Intel has designed their chips the way they have. As consumers we should be happy that there is a choice, allowing us to pick the cpu that best fits our computing needs.

So INtel is moving towards server and bussnies level while AMD moves toward game and home level....

 

[Zakharov]

So INtel is moving towards server and bussnies level while AMD moves toward game and home level....

Maybe not intentionally, that could just be the direction each company's research and development emphasis has taken them. They can't just decide to add things to a cpu by clicking their fingers. It requires months or years of designing and testing, along with a large amount of money, to create quality processors. Btw, I'm just speculating here so this is just one person's opinion. I don't have the two companies' business plans in front of me.

I should point out though that the server market is a different story altogether. In that sector it is not P4s and A64s which are used, but Intel Xeons and AMD Opterons which are designed to perform differently from desktop cpus.

 

[MarineCorps]

I don't have the two companies' business plans in front of me. .

Uh-huh.

I should point out though that the server market is a different story altogether. In that sector it is not P4s and A64s which are used, but Intel Xeons and AMD Opterons which are designed to perform differently from desktop cpus.

Always wondered that. How are they different?

 

[Thrawn]

Way more expensive than regular desktops for a start.

 

[Jeratain]

Always wondered that. How are they different?

This is where Google becomes your friend

 

[Zakharov]

I have very little knowledge on these server cpus so I did a little research.

The architecture if the Xeon seems to be identical to a P4 (likewise with the Opteron and A64). The main difference is that the server cpus are designed to work in conjunction with other cpus, ie. they can be paired together to make a dual cpu rig. In fact the Opteron can be run as an 8 cpu system, as shown in THIS article.

One other difference between the Xeon and P4 is that the Xeon has its 64 bit functions enabled.

It therefore seems to me that the higher price of these cpus is only justified if you need a multi cpu system (ie. servers). The profit margins on these cpus are much higher than the desktop cpus though, so businesses are encouraged to buy Xeons or Opterons for workstations when they don't really need them.

 

[Mikoyan]

Waiting for dual core AMD64's now.

 

[HAND]

Not trying to rain on Intel's parade, but that 2mb L2 cache increases the latency etc etc..
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2353&p=2

 

[MarineCorps]

This is where Google becomes your friend

Tried that several months ago. Failure clearly was an option

 

[MarineCorps]

One other difference between the Xeon and P4 is that the Xeon has its 64 bit functions enabled.

Not any longer

Intel's latest Pentium 4 processors bring long-awaited 64-bit support to the desktop, along with -- in the 600 series -- notebook-style cooling technology.

Intel has introduced a new family of Pentium 4 chips, the 600 series, and also added another member that's clocked at 3.73GHz to its high-end Pentium 4 Extreme Edition line. You can expect to see these new chips later this month in a wide range of desktops -- mainstream and performance PCs for both home and business use. The new chips underscore the fact that today's new processors are about added features and not a simple increase in raw clock speed. Take a look, for example, at the 600 series:

Processor Clock speed Processor Clock speed
Pentium 4 660 3.6GHz Pentium 4 560 3.6GHz
Pentium 4 650 3.4GHz Pentium 4 550 3.4GHz
Pentium 4 640 3.2GHz Pentium 4 540 3.2GHz
Pentium 4 630 3.0GHz Pentium 4 530 3.0GHz

These four new chips are clocked at the same speed as their 500-series equivalents. So, what's changed? For starters, the new 600 parts have twice the amount of L2 cache that the previous generation had. The Pentium 4 600 series features 2MB of L2 cache to the 500 series' 1MB allotment, which allows the chips to quickly access more frequently used data, improving overall performance.

The 64-bit question

More significantly, the Pentium 4 600 chips and the 3.73GHz Pentium 4 Extreme Edition bring Intel up to speed with competitors AMD and Apple, both of which introduced 64-bit desktop processors in 2003. Intel brought 64-bit support to its Xeon server chips, but until now, the company has let its desktop CPUs linger in 32-bit mode. To be fair, nobody is running 64-bit applications on the desktop today, and Microsoft has been dragging its feet with a 64-bit version of Windows, though the company has stated that its 64-bit OS -- available now as a Release Candidate -- will be released in the first half of this year.

With the new chips, you'll be able to run the 64-bit applications of tomorrow and go beyond the current 4GB memory maximum of 32-bit systems. PCs will be more powerful because they'll be able to carry more memory in addition to using more advanced CPUs. And with demanding, more sophisticated 64-bit programs on the horizon, this additional horsepower is sure to be put to use. Dubbed Extended Memory 64-bit Technology (EM64T), the IA-32 extension closely resembles the AMD 64-bit architecture. Chips with EM64T will be able to run today's 32-bit operating systems and applications, and when 64-bit software begins to emerge, you'll have a platform that will be able to make the leap.


With the new 600-series Pentium 4 chip, Intel finally follows competitors AMD and Apple into the world of 64-bit computing. These chips will also run cooler than last year's Prescott-core Pentium 4 chips, and they could make your PC less susceptible to viruses.

Keep it cool, keep it safe

Intel has added a version of its SpeedStep technology to the Pentium 4 600 chips. SpeedStep provides longer battery life for Intel notebooks and keeps heat down, too. Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology (EIST) will power down the processor when you aren't using every last megahertz in order to keep the chip from generating needless heat. EIST is not featured on the high-end 3.73GHz Pentium 4 Extreme Edition, since its owners are likely to require every last ounce of performance from it.

Both the Pentium 600 chips and the new Extreme Edition CPU provide added security. When Windows XP SP2 was released last year, it included a security feature call Data Execution Prevention (DEP) that protects PCs against some viruses that exploit buffer overflows. Trouble was, only newer AMD and a handful of Intel's Itanium server chips supported the DEP feature, leaving your PC open to worms such as MS Blaster and Sasser. The new Intel chips include an Execute Disable Bit, which will let you enable DEP, adding another layer of protection to your PC.

The fine print

The newly announced Intel chips are built on the 90-nanometer process that was first introduced to the desktop with the Prescott-core Pentium 4 chip released a year ago. Like the Prescott chips, the 600-series processors have an 800MHz bus and are compatible with Socket 775 (LGA775) motherboards. The number of transistors has increased from 125 million with Prescott to 169 million on both the Pentium 4 600 chips and the 3.73GHz Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. The new P4 EE chip also features a faster 1,066MHz bus that was introduced last year on the 3.46GHz P4 EE.

Looking ahead, Intel's next move for high-end desktop processors is expected to occur in the coming months, with the launch of its first dual-core processors.

I see intel is no longer wanting to have any more P4s with a clock speed below 3Ghz.

 

[MarineCorps]

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20050221comp.htm $224 dollars for their cheapest one. SO gettiing AMD when I build my new 64bit computer