Prescott not looking very impressive..

[Stoo]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13847

Prescott 3.2GHz Northwood 3.2GHz
PC Mark 2004
PC Marks 5098 5059
Comanche 4 Demo
1024x768@32 bit 57 65
Quake 3 Arena 4
1024x768@32 bit 350 380
Aquamark 3
1024x768 44086 44334
Cinebench 2003
CPU Bench (secs) 78.8 69

and it runs 10°C hotter compared to the northwood..

Looks like the year belongs to AMD then..

[Skii]

Well if they are going to name a CPU after that fat yob its hardly a blessing

[Stoo]

hahaha, that's very true

[Oxide]

That review is pants it shows nothing except a few numbers, they dont show you what motherboard and bios was used.

Remember some boards wont make use of the 1mb cache. Without that its bound to be less impresisve than a northwood.

Wait for PROPER reviews to come out next month before pre judging it

[Stoo]

"Canterwood 875 Board"

IMHO it's good enough for an initial indication of things to come.

If a board supports a p4 expensive edition, with it's extra cache, then I'd say it's a safe bet that a board will also support the cache of the prescott chip.

Besides, even some of the Intel people admit that precott isn't going to do much until the die-shrink..

[Oxide]

THe boards arent supporting the extra cache tho and thats the whole problem.

Manufacturers are having to fix the current issues then prescott will show its true values.

pop on over to xtremesystems and read what the guy with the samples has to say

[gamezfreak]

*pats savings for Athlon 64*

Sod "Less"cott, AMD have won this round.

[malfunction]

Remember some boards wont make use of the 1mb cache. Without that its bound to be less impresisve than a northwood.

Erm... Where do you get that idea from? It's part of the CPU. The CPU makes use of it. Nothing else is required.

[Ethos]

I wouldn't speak too soon:

http://www.vrforums.com/showthread.php?threadid=12686 < Looking good

Wait till we have some proper benches out, I doubt they are accurate at all.

[Oxide]

I agree ethos mate too many people are jumping on the bandwaggon and slating it without REAL reviews coming out.

[Grey M@a]

The thing is Oxide is right. Yes the mobo manufacturers are supporting the new Prescotts atm with BIOS updates but the majority of them are not taking full advantage of the extra on die cache. I would say wait for the reviews to come out when the fully supportive motherboards arrive and then make up your minds. Either way, a P4 Prescott or an AMD 64 is going to burn a hole in your savings :S

[Stringent]

I don't think the Prescott will be that much more than their Northwood counterparts.

[Nox]

benefit of prescott *could* be that they are usuable in your current canterwood board...

Nox

[malfunction]

The thing is Oxide is right. Yes the mobo manufacturers are supporting the new Prescotts atm with BIOS updates but the majority of them are not taking full advantage of the extra on die cache. I would say wait for the reviews to come out when the fully supportive motherboards arrive and then make up your minds. Either way, a P4 Prescott or an AMD 64 is going to burn a hole in your savings :S

I'm not trying to flame people here but honestly there's nothing that the mobo needs to do with the cache... The CPU uses it. There's no extra pins, no extra instructions and nothing to enable. If the CPU wants to fetch data / an instruction it first looks in the L1 cache, then the L2 cache and if it's in neither it goes to main memory (i.e. sends a request to the northbridge). What's that got to do with the 512K extra cache working or not?

[Grey M@a]

the thing is the mobo's out there at this moment in time were never designed around the prescotts, more likely the northwoods and canterwoods. Although it can be argued that the Prescott and Canterwoods are the same processor with a few bells and whistles attached to it, the Prescott does have its subtle additions that we will only see the true advantage of them once the boards are fully designed around them. Its the same with any new processor really, just gotta give it time and wait for the overclocking reports and reviews come in when it is officially released

Remember the fuss about the A64 chips and how they were rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbishe and wouldnt clock that well, then a few weeks later people got hold of the newer versions and mobos and they shifted like rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbish off a stick (pardon my french) give it time and see what happens because in reality we are all gonna be saving for a while for a new Prescott or A64 top of the line beasts

[malfunction]

the thing is the mobo's out there at this moment in time were never designed around the prescotts, more likely the northwoods and canterwoods. Although it can be argued that the Prescott and Canterwoods are the same processor with a few bells and whistles attached to it, the Prescott does have its subtle additions that we will only see the true advantage of them once the boards are fully designed around them. Its the same with any new processor really, just gotta give it time and wait for the overclocking reports and reviews come in when it is officially released

Remember the fuss about the A64 chips and how they were rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbishe and wouldnt clock that well, then a few weeks later people got hold of the newer versions and mobos and they shifted like rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbish off a stick (pardon my french) give it time and see what happens because in reality we are all gonna be saving for a while for a new Prescott or A64 top of the line beasts

Yes Prescott is different - and not just in terms of cache and pipeline... And there's a lot of stuff coming this year - DDR2, PCI express, etc that will def. have a positive effect upon a system containing a prescott CPU - but they would do the same for a Northwood based system too. Basically what we're talking about is removing bottle necks (PCI Express being faster than AGP and able to supply more voltage for the next gen GFX cards) and bandwidth to main memory (i.e. will help Prescott a lot for any cache misses - but would do the same for a Northwood CPU too - as would a higher FSB - though I'm not sure if that's coming with later Prescotts or with the Tejas core)...

Basically different issues really... Although from my mini-rant above I'm now wondering if we'll start seeing 'super socket 478' mobos with all the advances of Socket T mobos for people who aren't really interested in Prescott.

Interesting times - if Prescott has a lower IPC in most situations then AMD could bump their PR ratings up and get a free (perceived) speed boost out of it... Could be that Intel has actually helped AMD out here. (This in not my idea - an article on www.overclockers.com brought it up but I agree).

Not long until the reviews show up now!