IE the AthlonXP has fewer stages than the Athlon64 (10 V 12) however at a given clock speed it is much HOTTER for LESS performance.
The Northwood has fewer stages than the Prescott (20 v 31) however at a given clock speed it is much COOLER for MORE performance.
It makes more sense to compare performance to temp IMHO.
The longer the pipeline the more heat generated. The A64's increase in it's pipeline is a mere 2 over the XP which is offset by the fact that it uses SOI. That is the only reason why it runs less hot then the XP. The Prescott, on the other hand, has an increase of 11 in it's pipeline over the Northwood and does not use SOI or low-k. I just think Intel took the wrong path in designing the Prescott, it's inefficient.
That chip is a much better competitor for Athlon64 than Prescott IMHO and the sooner its *really* available for desktops the better for everyone (except perhaps AMD
)
I agree. Sadly they won't be supporting hyperthreading though. My guess is Intel wants it as an exclusive feature to advertise for it's Prescotts.