Intel vs AMD:|*TNG*|

Tahir2

Veteran
Supporter
Mega Hertz... what Mega Hertz ?

The 90 nm Prescott is expected to reach speeds of 4 GHz and beyond. The Integer Execution Units however runs at 8 GHz, so does the integer register file, the address generators and now, as we may presume, also the L1 data cache. So why call it a 4 GHz processor? Technically spoken it is not a 4 GHz processor but an 8 GHz processor...


A Chance for a Change

Such a sudden jump in Giga Hertz needs to be accompanied with a significant increase in performance to make it marketable to the average customer. The 50% ... 60% extra performance brought by improved Simultaneous Multi Threading does offer this as a one-time-only opportunity. If Intel ever wants to use the real frequency of the Integer Pipeline then it has to make the transition with the introduction of the Prescott.

A name change to Pentium 5 would be appropriate to signal a major architecture change.



Marketing and Metaphors

To marketing the task to explain the term simultaneous multi threading to the general public. Most likely ending up with a number of metaphors that give people the illusion that they understand something while they are in fact totally confusing reality. We've heard a few nice ones from AMD when it had to explain that Mega Hertz is not the same as performance. Something like "Animals with little legs having to run like crazy just to keep up with the larger (Athlon) species...." The classical combustion engine may help here: "A four cylinder engine with twice the RPM produces the same amount of Horse Powers as an eight cylinder does ...." The extra complication is to explain how the second logical processor is result of the much higher frequency. " The processor is so incredible fast that it can work like two", Something like the energetic modern women who have a job and take care of their children at the same time... I would not be surprised that as a side effect of such a campaign we may see some psychiatric researchers proposing that raised brain wave frequencies can induce schizophrenia...



Well, for so far the hope that marketing can produce some decent consumer education...

An 8 GHz Processor in a 90 nm process would be consistent with Intel's statements that it's 70 nm processors will run at more then 10 GHz. These predictions were made already one and a halve year ago.

http://www.chip-architect.com/news/2002_04_16_Prescott_Prospects_.html

I can see the head lines now:

PR Ratings in PIV processors to combat XP Ratings by AMD

;)
 
If AMD pull that on us then I won't be impressed there either.

However I would probably still purchase one as long as my mobo could handle it and then wait for Clawhammer. If my mobo doesnt handle it I will wait for P4 or Clawhammer before I upgrade my processor (+mobo).

I am not anti-Intel, my first PC was a PII but I am in the habit of upgrading incrementally.

From Duron to Thunderbird to Palomino and now to Barton presumably. :)
Porbably will skip Throughbred altogether as I dont see the benefits of it apart from a higher clockspeed.

In fact if Intel did rate their processors using the double-pumped clock to show Mega Hertz then they would have a valid point as that article mentioned and could in the future consider it.

Just thinking about Joe Average who is an Intel zealot anyway no matter which way you look at it. :)
 
Intel is really dissapointing me with the P4 IPC.
IMHO the PPro was the best Intel design ever.

Just give me an improved PPro core with an onchip ddr memory controller and you get something close to a Clawhammer.

My next micro will be AMD because of cost concerns.
 
PPro like core + DDR memory controller would probably still not compare to Clawhammer methinks ;)

Looks like AMD have really tweaked the crap out of what is possible using x86 architecture standard with regards to IPC !!! But then again what do I know?

The P4 1.6a would probably be a good buy if you could overclock it to 2GHz plus. The initial P4 core was a bag of shite and I think was released earlier than intended to try and help Intel win back some of its credibility since Athlon had really killed the PIII at 1GHz+. The newer Northwood has been shaping up pretty good even though its IPC is still a LOT lower than an Athlon XP.

Still like Typedef_Enum I would not mind toying with the idea of a P4 based system could I afford one ;)

And since I have an Athlon XP 1600 overclocked sometimes to XP 1900 speeds I dont see the need to upgrade just yet...
 
My current CPU is a 1.13GHz P3-S (512kb cache) and it is more like a Athlon 1.1GHz. It is fast enough for me (SOHO with casual gaming), cool, quiet, very good.
My guess is that with a onchip fast ddr memory controller and a faster clock it could be great 8)
But you are right about ClawHammer, it is more than that.

The AthlonXP 1600 looks excellent ;)

I will move to AMD socket A because of cost, small performance improvment now and an upgrade path to Barton in the future (next year). I am waiting my friend in Miami import it (with other things). The spec:
-Abit NV7-133R mobo (very feature rich)
-AthlonXP 1600 or TBred 1900 (if available)
-MCX370 cooler (is it too noisy?)
-2x256MB standard PC2100 crucial or kingston memory

The P3-S will be used to upgrade my test server (more noble function, nice setup with pro SCSI drives).
 
I bet the Abit board doesnt work with Barton when Barton comes out.

This has happened too many times with Abit to blame each time - I lost faith in them and VIA too a little because of the KT133 debacle. Also there are problems with Abits new boards (older revision) not even supporting Throroughbred.

In my case it is once bitten twice shy.
 
I had a Abit BH6 and it was a great 440BX board.
I will search for about the Abit and TBred.
Thanks
 
Back
Top