New P4 before Prescott ??

[FragMagnet]

I noticed this at another forum, apparently Intel has tooled up an Xeon for desktop use. It has an additional 2 mb cache, and comes in the 3.2 Ghz flava. Yes I know the source is weak, but may prove interesting.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11576

edit: Anand seems to be confirming it, 2mb of L3 cache, I sure hope it works on current 865/875 mobo's.

http://www.anandtech.com/#20522

[Liquide]

I am afraid to guess what it's going to cost! :stick:

Btw, Anand didn't confirm it, they posted a link to TheInq article :p

[FragMagnet]

I noticed that about Anands, I actualy found another reference at Hardware Underground, quoting Anands as the source. But Anand references the INQ article.

But for Intel to take this step, it would suggest that the Prescott may not work on the older 865/875, or at initial clockspeeds it won't keep up with the new AMD ?

I assume cost will be inline with the other top end chips. Since AMD wants Intel $ for it's flagship product

[Hentai-san]

Wow! I sure hope that Intel will produce this one... I want one! :D

[toymaker]

A 2mb cache socket 478 'Zeon' so to speak would be a good move although initially quite price prohibitive. A 2mb cache version of the 2.4C would become very popular after the initial high priced release.

[saaya]

but cache doesnt really help in games, does it?

[FragMagnet]

Originally posted by saaya
but cache doesnt really help in games, does it?

NW's seem to game better than Williamette's, and Williamette's better than Celerons, but L3 ? Who knows ??

[tombman]

btw, it is CONFIRMED NOW... at anandtech....

And prescott will be even better with more transistors @ half the cache :eek:

[Perc]

the question is? will it run on my 875 chip set? cause if it will then ill be getting one for sure!

perc,

[ROACH]

MAX3 will handle it it has L3 cache options:D :banana:

[FragMagnet]

Doesn't get anymore official than this

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20030916corp_b.htm?iid=Homepage+Highlight_030916b&

[Zroc]

Originally posted by saaya
but cache doesnt really help in games, does it?
Actually, games is one of the things more cache helps out the most.
About the only thing cache really doesn't effect is media encoding/video editing.

This will give you a really good idea of the effect:
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=xeon3061MB&page=6

That's the Xeon 3.06 (no L3) versus the Xeon 3.06 with 1MB L3.
Pretty nice gains, and the extra MB will help even more.

All very interesting...

[Metro]

I wonder if AMD could bring the Athlon64 half year before. Probably Intel have come with the Prescott alredy.
The first results available say it all about the performance from the Athlon in games. I think Intel is afraid.
Like Anand said "Let the war begin"
All of us will like this war:D

[rsandru]

Sounds interesting, but it looks like it's definitely not a Northwood core + extra cache but rather a different core (Xeon) in a P4 packaging.

Now what I would like to know is: how does it overclock?? It sure sounds very interesting because we all think it's going to O/C like a NW core, no? And if it doesn't? And how much more power do these extra millions of transistors eat/dissipate?

Who knows, maybe that at the end of the day a good O/C on a NW core will still be the fastest thing around.

Worth waiting for some tests before spending too much $$

Now if it *does* clock then count me in! :D

[zakelwe]

From the results on the 3.06 it seems between 6 and 9% are the order of the day, so agreeing with earlier posts then it boils down to whether it overclocks as well as 512KB P4's and what the heat ouput is, I seem to recall Xeons with large cache produce more than the famed 103W Prescott ( ie 107W).

Regards

Andy

[rsandru]

Some more news from X-bit can be found at this address: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/editorial/display/idf-fall2003-3_7.html

It seems that it's going to be a slightly redesigned Xeon core - so not really P4 and not really Xeon :confused:

Just thinking... how much heat can 169mio transistors dissipate...
:eek: time for a Prommy :D

[saaya]

Actually, games is one of the things more cache helps out the most.

ive read some reviews that said the exact opposite lol

[zakelwe]

Originally posted by rsandru
Some more news from X-bit can be found at this address: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/editorial/display/idf-fall2003-3_7.html

It seems that it's going to be a slightly redesigned Xeon core - so not really P4 and not really Xeon :confused:

Just thinking... how much heat can 169mio transistors dissipate...
:eek: time for a Prommy :D

I thought it would be <10% and slower than Prescott .. shows how wrong I was again if it is true. Looks like you aer right, might need some better cooling if I am going to buy one of those. I wonder whether it works with all 875i motherboards and just needs a BIOS update ?

Regards

Andy

[Ace-a-Rue]

If the price stays around $600 and it will work on my Asus P4P800 DLX, I am buying it!!:) But, I won't upgrade to an 875 board just to make this cpu work.

[rsandru]

Originally posted by Ace-a-Rue
If the price stays around $600 and it will work on my Asus P4P800 DLX, I am buying it!!:) But, I won't upgrade to an 875 board just to make this cpu work.

I wouldn't worry about that ;) - it's supposed to work on every P4 board otherwise they would shoot themselves in the foot (especially by calling it a P4 :-D). What it'll probably require is an updated BIOS to allow for L3 activation/deactivation.

I can only think of one problem: what if the power consumption is way out of standard? This means: If your board is Prescott ready then it should be able to power a P4 EE. If not then too bad.

[CONSPIRACY THEORY] Maybe Intel is testing the market by dropping a high consumption CPU in the hands of the enthusiasts just to make sure any non Prescott ready board gets replaced before Prescott is in the shops? :D Hmmm, not sure it makes sense....
[/CONSPIRACY THEORY]

[Ace-a-Rue]

Originally posted by rsandru
I wouldn't worry about that ;) - it's supposed to work on every P4 board otherwise they would shoot themselves in the foot (especially by calling it a P4 :-D). What it'll probably require is an updated BIOS to allow for L3 activation/deactivation.


1st of all, I don't worry about it until I spend the money and it doesn't work. I thought I should clear that up for you.;)

2nd, I doubt it will work on EVERY P4 board....if it works, it will be on the 845 PE, 865 or 875 boards, and maybe the 850. But, I wouldn't gamble on the 845 or 850. So, like everything else I do with computer purchases I would wait for those who knee jerk 1st:D to see if it is a viable chip in the 875 or 865 board.

[rsandru]

Originally posted by Ace-a-Rue
1st of all, I don't worry about it until I spend the money and it doesn't work. I thought I should clear that up for you.;)

2nd, I doubt it will work on EVERY P4 board....if it works, it will be on the 845 PE, 865 or 875 boards, and maybe the 850. But, I wouldn't gamble on the 845 or 850. So, like everything else I do with computer purchases I would wait for those who knee jerk 1st:D to see if it is a viable chip in the 875 or 865 board.

Well, since the 865/875 boards are the best in class right now, I wasn't really considering compatibility with the "older" chipsets. Obviously I was assuming that because it's going to be expensive and enthusiast oriented so there's a good probability that this kind of person's got either a 865 or 875 board already. If it's 100% compatible with the other boards as well, then it's even better.

BTW, I completely agree with your last statement... :cool:

[charlie]

This is one BAAAAD dog, outperforms 3.2 Prescott in games (read 3Dmark/AquaMark) and will cost MORE. Expect $800 and a bit hard to get...
C

[Ace-a-Rue]

Originally posted by charlie
This is one BAAAAD dog, outperforms 3.2 Prescott in games (read 3Dmark/AquaMark) and will cost MORE. Expect $800 and a bit hard to get...
C

I agree with your, "a bit hard to get"...

If it is $800, I would not jump on the bandwagon until it got down to $600 or so...OR, I just wait until Prescott shows up and see how that turns out. OR, should I dare to say this, defect back to the good side....hehehehehehehe:D

[Metro]

The first results are not spectacular.
The test was perform by aceshardware. Right now I cant connect to the page but you can see the results here http://www.clubic.com/n/n10013.htm

[Metro]

The original:
http://www.aceshardware.com/

Pentium 4 EE 3.4 GHz and 3.2 GHz benchmarks !! (CPU)
By johan
Friday, September 19, 2003 8:24 AM EDT

Well, when I tell you guys to visit us often, I am not kidding :). Drums please, here are the very first Pentium 4 EE results! A big thanks to Markus Weingartner and Kristof Sehmke!

Interestingly, Intel PR confirmed that a BIOS upgrade is not a requirement to run the new CPU. The 2MB L3 cache of the Xeon MP...euh... Pentium 4 EE will be recognized without upgrading the BIOS. This also applies for boards from other manufacturers (besides Intel).

Even more Interesting is that the default multiplier of our Pentium 4 EE test sample was 17, or in other words this seems to be a 3.4 GHz sample! Now it is possible that our AOPEN AX4C Max (i875 chipset) is responsible for this, but I doubt it. In the past 2 years, I have never seen any Intel CPU that could use a multiplier higher than it's default multiplier. Some samples were unlocked, but could only use *lower* multipliers. So, we do not even have Pentium 4 EE benchmarks, we can also add 3.4 GHz results. It seems that Intel could push the Pentium 4 EE to 3.4 GHz fairly easy, because this sample was running at 3.4 GHz with core voltage of 1.55V.

Ok, here are the benchmarks. All benchmarks are done on the AOPEN AX4CMax, with 2x 512 MB Corsair XMS DDR400 (2-3-3-7), and a Leadtek Geforce FX 5900 Ultra 256 MB. All benchmarks have been performed in Ace's lab (not in Intel's...)

Comanche 1024x768x32

P4 3.4 GHz EE : 73.8
P4 3.2 GHz EE : 70.4
P4 3.2 GHz : 61.8
Unreal Tournament Asbestos Botmatch 1280x1024x32

P4 3.4 GHz EE : 104.4
P4 3.2 GHz EE : 99.7
P4 3.2 GHz : 90.4
Wolfenstein Ennemy Territory 1024x768x32 High quality. Many thanks to our hardcore online gamer, Hawski, alias Uffe Merrild.

P4 3.4 GHz EE : 142.6
P4 3.2 GHz EE : 135.9
P4 3.2 GHz : 130.8
Unreal II (patched to 1.03)

P4 3.4 GHz EE : 68.9
P4 3.2 GHz EE : 65.6
P4 3.2 GHz : 61.2
Cinebench 2003

P4 3.4 GHz EE : 407
P4 3.2 GHz EE : 386
P4 3.2 GHz : 380
As we expected the 2 MB L3-cache can not do any wonders for Games, which are somewhat cacheable but also need streams of new data (memory intensive). The best result is a 14% in Comanche, which is of course quite impressive, as it means the L3-cache pushes the 3.2 GHz to the level of a 3.7 GHz Pentium 4. Quite a few games give only a 5-6% performance increase. Whether or not the P4 3.2 GHz will be an interesting option for hard core games will depend on the pricetag.

Is this kind of performance good enough to counter the Athlon 64 FX? Well, more hot stuff coming up here at Ace's hardware... Expect 3 new CPUs in our upcoming review!!

[zakelwe]

Thanks Metro,

If you can get a 10% improvement then you need to hit 3600+ on air to to equate to Ghz of P4 normal on air (impossible ? ) to make it worthwhile for the money.

Mind you if it has a 16 17x multiplier it does mean you can go further with your memory at 1:1 before you go down to 5:4, would this mean another 3-5%?? ,, Zroc probably has the figures.

Regards

Andy

[Ace-a-Rue]

Originally posted by zakelwe
Thanks Metro,

If you can get a 10% improvement then you need to hit 3600+ on air to to equate to Ghz of P4 normal on air (impossible ? ) to make it worthwhile for the money.

Mind you if it has a 16 17x multiplier it does mean you can go further with your memory at 1:1 before you go down to 5:4, would this mean another 3-5%?? ,, Zroc probably has the figures.

Regards

Andy

That speed should be doable for a 3.2 on air using 235 fsb with 1:1...

[charlie]

for the competetive benchmarker...17 x 270 = 4590mHz benchable at 1:1 cas2.5, 3,3,6 will be a bombshell!
Even 5%-10% ...ok it'll turn a 24K 3dMark rig into a Page 1 machine.
C

[Metro]

One question is do it overclock like a "normal" Northwood? The Vcore is low and that can indicate it.
I espected a bigger diference from the regular 3.2.
But if charlie is right it will be a winner. Althrough, I think if AMD in the last six months have had give more competition we alredy could have seen this for a long time. The answer from Intel was very quick. They for sure have this processor for a long time wathing.

[Ace-a-Rue]

Originally posted by Metro
The answer from Intel was very quick. They for sure have this processor for a long time wathing.

I agree with you...