Intel spills beans on Yonah, the next notebook chip

AN FRANCISCO--Yonah, a notebook chip coming from Intel in the first part of next year, is going to be a lot different than its predecessors, company executives say.

The chip, which will be made on the 65-nanometer process, will come with a number of enhancements over the current Pentium M line of notebook chips, Mooly Eden, vice president of the mobility group, said at a briefing here.

For one thing, it will contain two cores, instead of the single core on current notebook chips. The two separate cores will also share a 2MB cache. Current dual-core desktop chips from Advanced Micro Devices and Intel come with similar sized caches, but each core accesses only 1MB of cache memory dedicated to it. Sharing the cache will significantly boost performance. (The chips communicate with the cache through a single bus embedded in the chip.)

News Link

Here is Tom's Hardware Yonah dual-core processor to get 'Smart Cache', Hyper-Threading Article: Link

Pentium M x50 -> 2.17 ГГц,dual-core , 667 MHz, 2 MB cache -> $637;
Pentium M x40 -> 2.0 ГГц,dual-core , 667 MHz, 2 MB cache -> $423;
Pentium M x30 -> 1.83 GHz, dual-core, 667 MHz, 2 MB cache -> $294;
Pentium M x20 -> 1.67 GHz,dual-core , 667 Mhz, 2 MB cache -> $241;
Pentium M x18 -> 1.67 GHz, single core(Dothan), 667 Mhz, 2 MB cache -> $209.
TDP=31W
there will be two models with low voltage
Pentium M x48 -> 1.67 GHz, dual-core, 667 MHz , 2 MB cache -> $316;
Pentium M x38 -> 1.5 GHz, dual-core, 667 MHz , 2 MB cache -> $284.
TDP=16W
These processors will work with i945PM & i945GM chipsets. Also 955XM is mentioned
Source x86-secret

nice info cooper prices are OK! i guess is the 65nm process

Any idea where it will be produced ???

Might give us an idea of its infrastructure.

Perkam

Well tech process surely will be 65nm. Also Hyper-Threading and power saving systems will be included. To save even more power one of the cores could be switched-off. Yonah will have mPGA478MT socket, but it will be different from the ones for P4. Yonah`s is on the right.

And it also won't be 64bit.. This could be a drawback for Intel. But Windows XP64 hasn't proved to be totally worth the upgrade yet either.

they should have made it 800fsb

its not 64bit? hmmmmm

enzor OC it :)

When will these guys be available? Q1 2006?

I really think that the x50 will probably beat the crap out of the X2 4800+ at stock.

Just a question for the Dothan P-M experts out there, how does only 1mb lvl2 cache of Celeron-M compare in real world apps with proper 2mb lvl2 cache?

Even if the hit is significant I'd venture to say that the optimisations that Intel will give Yonah alone will help it :slapass: the X2. With HT (HT with 2x32k lvl1 cache will be great!) it will blow away the X2.

I wonder how people are gonna overclock these Dothan's....if they run on 667 bus, DDR2-900 on x50 will yield ~ 2.928. Probably quiet acheivable on stock air.

With 4-2-2-x timings and massive bandwidth these CPU's will be killers.

Personally I hope they come with decent heat spreaders and sockets so I can get something like an XP-120 on it. Over 3Ghz will probably be no problem. By then I'm guessing DDR2-1000 at 4-2-2-X will probably be available. Let me calc. the 1:1 clock with that stuff....3.253ghz.

I'm just hoping that the chipset's will be able to handle this kind of memory. I'm assuming CPU's will. If not on stock then with w/c'ing.

Man 2006 will be so exciting! I just wonder what AMD is gonna do to compete? It's CPU's will be the flame throwing energy draining beasts relative to Yonah especially on 90mn process with X2 5000 , 5200+!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikesta

When will these guys be available? Q1 2006?

I really think that the x50 will probably beat the crap out of the X2 4800+ at stock.

Just a question for the Dothan P-M experts out there, how does only 1mb lvl2 cache of Celeron-M compare in real world apps with proper 2mb lvl2 cache?

Even if the hit is significant I'd venture to say that the optimisations that Intel will give Yonah alone will help it :slapass: the X2. With HT (HT with 2x32k lvl1 cache will be great!) it will blow away the X2.

I wonder how people are gonna overclock these Dothan's....if they run on 667 bus, DDR2-900 on x50 will yield ~ 2.928. Probably quiet acheivable on stock air.

With 4-2-2-x timings and massive bandwidth these CPU's will be killers.

Personally I hope they come with decent heat spreaders and sockets so I can get something like an XP-120 on it. Over 3Ghz will probably be no problem. By then I'm guessing DDR2-1000 at 4-2-2-X will probably be available. Let me calc. the 1:1 clock with that stuff....3.253ghz.

I'm just hoping that the chipset's will be able to handle this kind of memory. I'm assuming CPU's will. If not on stock then with w/c'ing.

Man 2006 will be so exciting! I just wonder what AMD is gonna do to compete? It's CPU's will be the flame throwing energy draining beasts relative to Yonah especially on 90mn process with X2 5000 , 5200+!

---

Yes because you can overclock LAPTOP chips pretty well....especially considering there wont be a desktop motherboard which can accept the mPGA478MT socket....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cooper

Yonah will have mPGA478MT socket, but it will be different from the ones for P4. Yonah`s is on the right.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

its not 64bit? hmmmmm

---

Yes, it won't be. Warp2search posted something about that last week I believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorgeous

Yes because you can overclock LAPTOP chips pretty well....especially considering there wont be a desktop motherboard which can accept the mPGA478MT socket....

---

If it is incompatible with current desktop solutions (M/B's, Adaptor) then someone will make a solution pretty quick. If so I see wholesale desertion of AMD by enthusiasts migrating to Yonah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikesta

If it is incompatible with current desktop solutions (M/B's, Adaptor) then someone will make a solution pretty quick. If so I see wholesale desertion of AMD by enthusiasts migrating to Yonah.

---

Perhaps, but, I like Windows x64 so far. Yonah wouldn't exactly make for a good upgrade. It's a nice downgrade though :)

I'm looking forward to seeing one of these puppies sitting in the next generation of powerbooks! That's one of the first places they'll probably appear and it will probably be the first system that Apple will use Intel chips in since they're dying to make newer powerbooks but can't with their current G5 processors! My lovely Dell P-M system is still ticking over nicely but being able to have something that looks like an Apple, runs OS-X and can also run Windows with probably only a teeny weeny bit of work sounds a-ok to me.

Quote:

---

Corrected: Intel decides to hold 64-bit mobile CPU launch until 2Q06 10:30AM
AMD will take a headstart and a chance for the lead in the 64-bit mobile CPU market with its forthcoming Turion 64, as Intel will not launch its 64-bit mobile CPU until the second quarter of 2006, Taiwan notebook makers said.

Notebook makers are currently preparing their lineups for the new AMD Turion 64-bit notebooks, sources in the Taiwan notebook industry observed. A February 5 article stated that Hewlett-Packard (HP), Acer and Asustek Computer are increasing their respective orders for AMD-based notebooks this year.

In addition, Microsoft will release its Windows XP 64-bit edition this quarter, according to a CNET 1 March report. AMD Turion 64 should be the only standard to support the version before the availability of Intel's 64-bit mobile CPU.

Editor's note: In the original article, we incorrectly stated that Intel would be delaying its Yonah CPU and erroneously cited a Register article as a source. The Register stated that Intel would release its ultra-low Yonah CPU in the second quarter of 2006.

---

what Processor they are trying to hold? Yonnah? Yonnah is the only Mobile processor coming in 2006 from Intel. and Yonnah is a part of NAPA platform.

I'm sure Yonnah has 64bit support.


EDIT: I also read that Apple is going to use Yonnah for their computers in 2006, not sure if they will use them for desktops.. Intel D's are running very hot on Intel's own chipset lols.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by notoriousformula

I'm sure Yonnah has 64bit support.

---

At first it will not.

133mhz bus :(
2.17Ghz topmodel :(

I think a dual-core dothan can do better than that. It is very clear that they are trying to keep it cheap because it's dual-core and AMD is somewhat behind in the mobile platform. Or do they have problems with the 65nm process? Prices are very good though so I'm still happy. Just the clocks are soooooo low.

Some new pics of Intel`s future processors: Dempsey(XeonDP), Presler(desktop), Yonah(mobile), Montecito(Itanium). Also Smithfield.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alexio

133mhz bus :(
2.17Ghz topmodel :(

I think a dual-core dothan can do better than that. It is very clear that they are trying to keep it cheap because it's dual-core and AMD is somewhat behind in the mobile platform. Or do they have problems with the 65nm process? Prices are very good though so I'm still happy. Just the clocks are soooooo low.

---

Where does it say that this runs on a 133 bus? My impression is that it is on running on DDR2 667 which is great if my assumption is correct (Same as AMD's M2 Socket CPU's).

If that is the case who cares about the low clock? It will be easy to overclock to around 3.0ghz, meaning it won't be that far behind a stock Pentium D, except that it will rape in for performance and consume less power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikesta

When will these guys be available? Q1 2006?

I really think that the x50 will probably beat the crap out of the X2 4800+ at stock.

Just a question for the Dothan P-M experts out there, how does only 1mb lvl2 cache of Celeron-M compare in real world apps with proper 2mb lvl2 cache?

Even if the hit is significant I'd venture to say that the optimisations that Intel will give Yonah alone will help it :slapass: the X2. With HT (HT with 2x32k lvl1 cache will be great!) it will blow away the X2.

I wonder how people are gonna overclock these Dothan's....if they run on 667 bus, DDR2-900 on x50 will yield ~ 2.928. Probably quiet acheivable on stock air.

With 4-2-2-x timings and massive bandwidth these CPU's will be killers.

Personally I hope they come with decent heat spreaders and sockets so I can get something like an XP-120 on it. Over 3Ghz will probably be no problem. By then I'm guessing DDR2-1000 at 4-2-2-X will probably be available. Let me calc. the 1:1 clock with that stuff....3.253ghz.

I'm just hoping that the chipset's will be able to handle this kind of memory. I'm assuming CPU's will. If not on stock then with w/c'ing.

Man 2006 will be so exciting! I just wonder what AMD is gonna do to compete? It's CPU's will be the flame throwing energy draining beasts relative to Yonah especially on 90mn process with X2 5000 , 5200+!

---

Those dual core yohans will be facing off against QUAD CORE a64's!... 2k6 marks the release of those chips... Socket M baby! You *really* expect a dual core chip to beat a quad cored a64?

Also, how do YOU know they'll overclock so far? That's all speculation, and if you say "well it's on 65nm", so is amd's quad core chips... Yep, that's right, next round of chips from AMD is going 65nm as well! Whatever benefit it gives intel would also hold true for AMD, now wouldn't it?

ok that itanic core is just nuts... no wonder they scrapped the program and were charging several grand a cpu.. the core is the size of the entire prescott package...

woa nice pics there cooper! those deserve their own news thread :D
anmd yeah the size of the itanium is just mindblowing... how many of them do they fit on a wafer? 20? and how many of them will be functional? 2? 1? 1 every few wafers? :eek:

and yonah is def 64bits, im very sure about it! intel has added sse3 support to their dothans, they want to have their mobile chips as feature rich as their desktop chips, so it will def be 64bit. and apple is going for yonah chips and they sure wont go back to 32bits after they already went 64bits before everybody else! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

Those dual core yohans will be facing off against QUAD CORE a64's!... 2k6 marks the release of those chips... Socket M baby! You *really* expect a dual core chip to beat a quad cored a64?

Also, how do YOU know they'll overclock so far? That's all speculation, and if you say "well it's on 65nm", so is amd's quad core chips... Yep, that's right, next round of chips from AMD is going 65nm as well! Whatever benefit it gives intel would also hold true for AMD, now wouldn't it?

---

OK so I am speculating, but I am going off some reasonable assumptions. The current Dothan's O/C extremely well as they are even with weak heatsinks/fans. With a proper socket (and also a proper heatspreeder) we'd be able to get better heatsinks or watercooling for these baby's. I am also assuming that 65nm will help in this regard. Lookng at the TDP these things aren't putting out much heat to begin with.

OH and BTW when will AMD have quad-core availalble on desktop? We will be extremely lucky to get that any earlier then very late 2006. Yonah will be out far before then.

I do assume that 65nm process will benefit A64, but at the moment 90nm Dothan > 90nm A64. Yonah will be a highly optimised revamped dual-core version of Dothan, so I'm willing to bet that 65nm Dothan > 65nm A64. It requires so much less power then a64 as well.

What I am waiting for is to see what/when K9 is going to be/out. K8 will not be able to compete with an optimised version of Dothan if the Intel Processor is not hamstrung my platform architecture.

As I have stated I am speculating but I believe I'm going off reasonable assumptions. Make of it what you will.

If there will be adaptor or mobo for Yonah I`m sure Intel won`t have a chance to sell any of NetBurst processors (Prescott2M, Smithfield, Presler). :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mikesta

OK so I am speculating, but I am going off some reasonable assumptions. The current Dothan's O/C extremely well as they are even with weak heatsinks/fans. With a proper socket (and also a proper heatspreeder) we'd be able to get better heatsinks or watercooling for these baby's. I am also assuming that 65nm will help in this regard. Lookng at the TDP these things aren't putting out much heat to begin with.

OH and BTW when will AMD have quad-core availalble on desktop? We will be extremely lucky to get that any earlier then very late 2006. Yonah will be out far before then.

I do assume that 65nm process will benefit A64, but at the moment 90nm Dothan > 90nm A64. Yonah will be a highly optimised revamped dual-core version of Dothan, so I'm willing to bet that 65nm Dothan > 65nm A64. It requires so much less power then a64 as well.

What I am waiting for is to see what/when K9 is going to be/out. K8 will not be able to compete with an optimised version of Dothan if the Intel Processor is not hamstrung my platform architecture.

As I have stated I am speculating but I believe I'm going off reasonable assumptions. Make of it what you will.

---

According to the AMD, quad core a64's will be quarter 1 2k6, not late 2k6.

You also have to remember, they're going to have to up the transistor count alot on the P-M to add in the features it needs. This will, inturn, up the power requirements of it, which will make for a hotter running chip... Now, they don't really need to add any more transistors to the A64 for quadcore as the chips were made with multiple cores in mind, thus the die-shrink will do nothing but lower power and heat. If they use low power transistors like they did in newark, they could probably match the power/heat of the yohan with ease.

This, too, is going off very reasonable assumptions, as well as more than a few cold hard facts.

It was noted before that Yonah will have HT. If so, the theoretical edge of QC AMD cpu's will shrink.

And don't forget that if Yonah's architecture will be more advanced than AMD's QC (as some will say that Dothan is more advanced than K8) - Yonah will definitly be with the upperhand.

Actually the first quad-core AMD will be Opteron. And it will come along with Socket F. Don`t think that AMD will release quad-cores for desktop so soon after that. Even Intel`s going to release their quad-core in early 2007. So I don`t think there is a big hurry to increase core quantity. Even now dual-core processors have performance boost only in professional apps like rendering or coding.

Dothan`s and Yonah`s architecture is based on P6 architecture that took place in PIII. So it`s not that new. It`s just had few improovements time-to-time like new tech processes and some new functions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shklak

It was noted before that Yonah will have HT. If so, the theoretical edge of QC AMD cpu's will shrink.

And don't forget that if Yonah's architecture will be more advanced than AMD's QC (as some will say that Dothan is more advanced than K8) - Yonah will definitly be with the upperhand.

---

More advanced? It's a modified P3... It's definitely not more advanced, it's just that the P3 was intel's BEST chip hands down, and the P4 was their biggest mistake, thus they're bringing back what they need to.

As for HT, If you look at the P-D 840EE, you'll see that HT with dual core doesn't have much benefit, and in most cases NEGATIVELY impacts overall performance.

Cooper, of course they'll do quad core op's first, they also did dual core first op's first... They almost always start with the opterons before going to the desktop with everything. They haven't, however, made any claims that quad core will not reach the desktop, and thus we have reason to believe they will, and NONE to believe they won't.... Also, didn't amd say they have a "very special" FX chip for when multithreading becomes mainstream(think for a minute here)? Of course, this final sentence is purely a guess and nothing more, but it does make perfect sense as making the FX quad and regulars dual would be the ultimate market divider.

Finally, you must remember, next year releases Socket M... Neither you, nor I , nor anyone without an AMD name tag have any idea what to expect out of that. To assume that yohan will be more technologically advanced is pure heresay, and blatant fanboyism at it's finest. We don't know what will happen, but we do know both companies are going to come next round with a completely fresh twist, and that we'll all have to buy new EVERYTHING to run em..... :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: 'ing technology!

Yes Socket M is surely a mystery for now. But about FX. This is purely gamers proc.(as AMD claims). Do you know any game that has an performance boost, playing it on dual-core platform ? I don`t. Heh and they`ll come only next year. Of course quad-core processors will go desktop. But IMO not next year. It`s just too costy and won`t have any performance improovement for avarage (or extreem) gamer. Even thought AGEIA is coming to market. Multycores are good for professionals needs-that`s their role. For now.
P.S. heh I think soon will be facing great problem: what to choose? Intel or AMD ?
i think it`s nice :)
P.S. what is QC :confused:

Cooper, AMD has stated it's saving a VERY special chip for when games go multi-threaded.. ALL games based on the UE3.0 engine will be multi-threaded. That alone would be enough to warrant releasing a multi-core fx... As for it being too expensive, they charge close to $1,000 for FX's anyway, so I don't see how they couldn't do it.

p.s. QC is Quad Core.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DilTech

According to the AMD, quad core a64's will be quarter 1 2k6, not late 2k6.

You also have to remember, they're going to have to up the transistor count alot on the P-M to add in the features it needs. This will, inturn, up the power requirements of it, which will make for a hotter running chip... Now, they don't really need to add any more transistors to the A64 for quadcore as the chips were made with multiple cores in mind, thus the die-shrink will do nothing but lower power and heat. If they use low power transistors like they did in newark, they could probably match the power/heat of the yohan with ease.

This, too, is going off very reasonable assumptions, as well as more than a few cold hard facts.

---

Mate I have to disagree on a number of things you have said in this and other posts.

I can't see the P-M transistor count needing to rise so much. Remember that the Yonah will have 2mb lvl2 Cache total (1mb per core).

Also are you sure that AMD will not need to add to their transistor count, or are you telling me that they will run quad-core off a 128 bit Memory controller? If so....No thanks AMD.

Also your assumption that A64 could match the power/heat of Yonah is crazy. No K8 processor currently in the ball park with Dothan regarding power/heat (also add size/cooling requirements). Not even the Turion's. Not the mention that a Dothan outperforms a Turion in general and would widen the gap if you make a performace / ( Power/Heat) ratio.

Before you launch into me or others about fanboyism, take a look at yourself. I am actually slightly biased toward AMD but I recognise that AMD dominance is under severe threat by P-M. Lucky for AMD that Intel is lazy and greedy (wants to cash in on Prescott based processors and maintain price premium of Dothan's) otherwise Intel could trash AMD in no time. Meanwhile AMD is being far too complacent, resting on their laurals. This is so frustrating to witness because I want good competetion.

Also I can't see what AMD is going to do to make a 'special' FX dual/multi-core chip. They have the K8 to work with. They vary it by having single/dual channel memory controllers, 512k to 1024K lvl2 cache, and frequency.

AMD will have to come up with the K9 to compete with the successor's of Dothan, and it seems like that is going to be in 2007 and no earlier. AMD has to pray that Intel doesn't get too aggressive.

Imagine if AMD does realise a Quad only for Intel to respond with a Quad-core Yonah based tech. WTF are AMD going to do? they will be up :banana::banana::banana::banana: creek. Feel free to debate my points.

I'm no fanboy either, my secondary pc is a p4 2.6C with an ATi 9800pro... The exact opposite of my main one ironically enough. My PC before that, a AXP 2100+, before that a p3 1 ghz.... I go with whatevers better at that time! Right now, it's ALL amd!

Now, without further ado...

Isn't K9 suppose to make it's appearance with Socket M? 2k6 marks the release of socket M with the DDR2 memory controller, 2k7 it jumps up to DDR3! There's an article about it at extremetech.com...

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1826595,00.asp

One part to look at is where they mention a special form of multithreading, where multiple cores will be able to share specific parts of the die yielding in an 80 PERCENT INCREASE in performance, but will cost an extra 50 percent in resources....

There are 2 new versions of Hypertransport coming up as well, we have no clue what these will do for the A64.

As for a "special" FX...Who knows, we obviously don't, all that's been said is that amd has a very special multi-core FX for when multithreading hits gaming. I don't work for them, but I'm sure it's more than just another 200mhz on the x2 4800+.... A good guess would be quad core, as it won't have to show up til games go multi-threaded, which will be next year.

Yonah is made for dual core, intel has stated to handle amd's quadcore they'll slap 2 yonahs together EXACTLY like they did their P-D... We can all see clear as day how that turned out.... Of course, that was with prescott cores, the worst core EVER made, so this might be a bit different...

Intel is actually going to have to add quite a bit to the P-M to make it desktop ready... Adding HT, 64-bit instructions, sse3, and a few other neccessities alone is going to up the transitor count by itself quite a bit, which inturn will raise the power requirements up quite a bit, as well as the heat output... This is a fact.

Yohan will have one other very large obstacle, and that would be desktop support. There's currently what, 2 mobo's and an adapter for only ONE mobo(which only supports ONE heatsink) for the P-M(which has been around for what...2 years?)? That'll HAVE to change, or the yohan still won't have a place in the desktop world, and if it does it's place will still be small except amongst those who change out their parts as often as they wash their laundary until they add 64 bit to them, which won't happen initially. They'll need it though as Longhorn will be out next year.

Personally, I'd LOVE to see intel do something big, they HAVE to, as netburst MUST go. Netburst has ALWAYS been a mistake, and intel should've stayed with the p3 instead of going for the p4. CPU's have been in a slump(besides multicore, which is currently pointless for anything non-professional) for quite awhile, since the release of the A64 there hasn't been a single leap forward besides a few speedbumps. This is because the competition hasn't been there, as you stated....

Now, with the upcoming K9 and intel dropping the netburst tech(which the first desktop based on the p-m should show up around 2k7) things are about to really pick up again. Hopefully intel comes correct, or amd will be taking ALOT more chunks out of their market share.

Diltech. I think your latest post here is quite reasonable.

However I was under the impression that K9 was going to be when a DDR3 platform is released in 2007? It appears that K9 will consist of a large shared Lvl3 cache. Other then that we have no info!

I sincerely hope they do a fair bit more then that. At least 1 single channel memory controller (64bit) per core will be a must. Personally I would like to see AMD reduce the lvl2 cache latencies of K8 and maybe lvl1 cache as well. This will benefit their processors greately! HT will also help a64 if implemented correctly.With its 128 total lvl1 cache HT will be a killer on a64's (just as it will be in 32+32 lvl1 cache of Dothan's/Yonah.

You see A64's and Dothan's are very similar beasts.

Both have Large lvl1 caches a64=64+64, Dothan 32+32 as opposed to p4's and most P3's 16+12 etc

Both have short pipelines relative to Prescott.

After this is where they diverge but they are basically trying to do the same thing. Increase processing power by reducing latencies.

a64 does this by including an ondie memory controller.

Dothan does this by including lvl1 and especially lvl2 cache with very low latencies. Dothan includes a large cache to ensure pipeline's are always filled.

If either processor took on the main aspect of the other, then we would be looking at a super processor. Yonah with on die mem controller or a64 with signiificantly reduced cache latencies would be monsters!

However in current form it seems that Intel's solution is actually superior to AMD's. Intel howver is happy to cripple it (so it can't effect sales of p4's which it is still trying to get a good return on investment from) and sell
P-M's for crazy prices.

Quote:

---

However in current form it seems that Intel's solution is actually superior to AMD's

---

Heh. Dothan is based on P6 architecture. Don`t think that this old style is better than K8 :) But it relly is better than NetBurst

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cooper

Heh. Dothan is based on P6 architecture. Don`t think that this old style is better than K8 :) But it relly is better than NetBurst

---

Man I'm alittle tired of people saying Dothan is based on PIII's.

Tell me how many PIII's had 32+32 Lvl1 cache? Or 1-2 MB of Level2 cache.
It is its own architecture. It's not like the son, or brother of the PIII, maybe a cousin.

If Netburst was not created and Intel just kept on using shrinkage to improve performance of PIII's it would not turn out like Dothan at all.

heh...if Intel woudn`t be at that way of big numbers and just kept improoving P6 it wouldn`t be like Dothan at all - it would be much more greater thing.
And architecture is not just caches capacity. I don`t think that you will deny the fact that Dothan is based on P6.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cooper

heh...if Intel woudn`t be at that way of big numbers and just kept improoving P6 it wouldn`t be like Dothan at all - it would be much more greater thing.
And architecture is not just caches capacity. I don`t think that you will deny the fact that Dothan is based on P6.

---

Your not serious are you? If intel kept improving P6, say 130nm then 90nm process it would not be better then a Dothan (Even though it would likely be operating between 2-3ghz). P4 wasn't great granted, but it still isn't that bad. Northwoods are quite nice processors. Personally I wonder how a 90nm Northwood would have faired....

Now regarding architecture - caches are VERY important. the size and latencies make a big difference.

I won`t argue with you Mikesta - you are right. Just wanna speak my thoughts about K9. As you all know AMD is going to release it`s quad-core processor next year already - and it`s going to be server one. Though that innovations oftly comes in this sector there`s just might be that K9 will comes with this high-tech piece of silicon. Also it would be nice to see next to it DDR3 or XDR RAM, which is a lot better than DDRII. More than that these types of memory are already being produce. This could possible be quad-channel 128 bit compared to dual-channel 64 bit that DDR & DDRII has. Personnaly I don`t wanna see DDRII next to new models of AMD with it`s on-die mem controller.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cooper

I won`t argue with you Mikesta - you are right. Just wanna speak my thoughts about K9. As you all know AMD is going to release it`s quad-core processor next year already - and it`s going to be server one. Though that innovations oftly comes in this sector there`s just might be that K9 will comes with this high-tech piece of silicon. Also it would be nice to see next to it DDR3 or XDR RAM, which is a lot better than DDRII. More than that these types of memory are already being produce. This could possible be quad-channel 128 bit compared to dual-channel 64 bit that DDR & DDRII has. Personnaly I don`t wanna see DDRII next to new models of AMD with it`s on-die mem controller.

---

I too am hoping that AMD gets off its high horse and starts scrambling to get a high quality innovative new product in a K9.

Slapping together a quad-core 65nm on K8 architecture is NOT innovative and I hope to God that it is NOT AMD's answer to Dothan's successor's.

I hope they will continue to push the envelope and continue to give Intel a run for their money.

Sorry to dig this back up...

According to the various sources I've seen, Yonah and Sossaman won't have:

* Hyperthreading (HT)
* EMT64

As many of us have seen with dual-core Pentium-D and XE models, HT doesn't offer much gain compared to dual-core itself. And there's little incentive in adding more complexity if it doesn't result as much gain as it does on the Pentium-M.

Remember what HT was originally for. To improve the number of instructions per cycle on the P4. Pentium-M is already there without HT.

Clock for clock, both the A64 and P-M solutions outgun P4 in most tasks. (Except for certain digital media applications).


As for EMT64 capability, well, that'll come in 2007. ;)


There is also no mention of a new feature with Yonah.

"Digital Media Boost"...That's the marketing name.

So what is it? According to http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21549

It's a fusion of the SSE and SSE2 micro operations with some new streaming extensions and improvements to floating point performance and to to the SSE decoder throughput.

It addresses performance areas that are lacking in the current "Dothan" core. What can we likely to expect? Newer Pentium-Ms becoming more capable as P4 in nearly everything. (If not, you'll see single-cored Yonahs are much improved over their Dothan brothers).

There is also rumour that Yonah might get virtualisation or Vanderpool Technology. It would be great to run multiple OSs simultaneously like I do with VMware. ;) (at least there is no longer a need to spend $350 Aussie on VMware any more).

As many of you know, the Yonah is made on the 65nm process.
The process is manufactured at Oregon, USA, at Intel's D1D Fab facility.


With regards to the argument or comment about Pentium-M being a PIII.

Technically, you should view it as a hybrid design.

The Israeli-based Intel team that developed the Banias (1st Generation P-M) was given the task of developing a mobile platform. They chose the Pentium III as the basis, as at the time, it offered the best power to performance ratio compared to the P4 (Netburst).

Using the PIII as basis, many changes were made. The FPU was much improved, the cache was larger but it had far less latency than both P4 and A64, the P4 bus is used, and power saving technologies were implemented.

Essentially, what Intel did was take what was already good from the PIII and the P4 designs, and made changes to produce the Pentium-M.

It does have characteristics of the Pentium III, but it doesn't mean its a complete PIII design...What PIII uses the P4 bus? ;)

BTW, I've tested PIII-S 1.4Ghz "Tualatin" and a Pentium-M 1.4Ghz "Banias" against each other. The differences between them is very noticable. I compressed a 4GB file using WinRAR, and the difference is quite dramatic. (we're talking about an almost 50% difference).

Even when I overclocked my old Celeron "Tualatin" 1.2Ghz to 1.6Ghz, it still took an hour longer to compiler API tools I was using. (2 hours for my Banias based notebook vs 3 hours for Celeron at 1.6Ghz).

I was simply impressed with the Pentium-M that I didn't bother with the P4. None of the PCs I own are P4-based. They're either Pentium III, Celeron (PIII-based) and Pentium-M. (Ok, I also have a VIA EPIA PD10000, which uses a C3 "Nehemiah" CPU).


As for the AMD K9....I don't see much info on it.
All I know its gonna be made on 65nm, is likely to be a quad-core solution, it was last heard to run at 3Ghz, and development of the K9 started back in March 2003.

Given the nature of how things are progressing with AMD, I expect K9 to come in late 2007. (It typically takes 4 to 5 years from starting the project to until the first retail product comes).

Quote:

---

BTW, I've tested PIII-S 1.4Ghz "Tualatin" and a Pentium-M 1.4Ghz "Banias" against each other. The differences between them is very noticable. I compressed a 4GB file using WinRAR, and the difference is quite dramatic. (we're talking about an almost 50% difference).

---

Well WinRAR performance is very depended on cache size, which is way bigger in Dothan than in PIII.

Quote:

---

at least there is no longer a need to spend $350 Aussie on VMware any more

---

Do you use it on commercial purposes ? If not why you spend yr money on it ? ;)

Quote:

---

As for EMT64 capability, well, that'll come in 2007

---

As Intel represantatives had informed this feature will come as market will require it. I think it will be sooner than 2007.

Quote:

---

As many of us have seen with dual-core Pentium-D and XE models, HT doesn't offer much gain compared to dual-core itself.

---

That is cos of Windows XP problems - it cannot work fine with 4 threads at once. Soon there will be some patch to fix this problem.

Quote:

---

Except for certain digital media applications

---

Which are very depended on actual processor speed.

Quote:

---

There is also rumour that Yonah might get virtualisation or Vanderpool Technology

---

It is not a rumour - it is a fact. At least some more powerfull models will support it.