• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

1066MHz support is here!

A

Adn4n

Golden Member
So there you have it folks - the 1066MHz FSB does absolutely nothing for performance. The 3.46EE does manage to outperform its 3.4GHz/800MHz FSB predecessor, but the margin of improvement is negligible. Intel desperately needs a win here and other than the more affordable price of the Pentium 4 560, there's very little going for the CPU king these days. It will take higher speed Prescott CPUs or dual core in order for the added bandwidth of the 1066MHz FSB to truly be of any use - and it will take lower latency DDR2 memory to finally give the latest Pentium 4 platforms lower latency memory access than the ones they replaced.
Click to expand...

Looks like another overpriced chip with close to no performance increase.
 
Originally posted by: IamTHEsnake
...until the 3.73EE
Click to expand...

How can 300mhz make a difference? PLEASE tell me that you have overclocked a processor by 300mhz and saw any significant difference.

edit: of course there is a difference, but you'll see an improvement of about 1-4%. Hardly even worth mentioning.
 
has it always been intel's strategy to use big numbers as a marketing tool? they remind me of Bose in the hifi world.
 
1066 FSB is majorly wasted on <4Ghz CPU's (or non-dual core), and alas, Intel is stuck in the sub-4Ghz range for quite a long time, thanks to Prescott.

Remember, 800FSB was meant for Prescott, which was supposed to go from 3 - 5 Ghz or so, and then 1200 FSB was intended for Tejas, which was supposed to go up from there... Boy did their plans get derailed.
 
Some of us have been running well above 1066 for quite sometime....I have 1182fsb and I never saw much improvement for fsb other then some benches. My 2.4b at 3.24ghz with a 712fsb versus a 2.4c @ 3.2ghz with by the way a 1066fsb had that 1-4% gain when looking at apps with no HT enabled. Yes it was faster clock to clock if we were looking at the numbers but it was neglible. The big gain for me was the HT in HT enabled apps. Plus the fact the 2.4c went on to 3.5ghz while the 2.4b was not very stable past the 3.24ghz mark. Prime pass but error out in Autocad, Divx, and some other intense apps.
 
Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire


Oh, they'll be back with the P4 1066FSB EE ROFL BBQ 3.4GHz, offering a 5% improvement in performance at a 50% price increase!

- M4H
Click to expand...

Aren't all the new P4s "BBQ edition" these days?

hur hur, I made a funny.

 
Maybe the 3.7EE can finally best the 3800+

And as the 3.46EE is already at 110 watts, maybe with the 3.7EE you can cut down on your heating bills at the same time you're gaming 😉 It will practically pay for itself in about 15 years.
 
More Intel bashing, very common on these forums and many other forums that include 15 year old's with no money. What a pathetic waist of a thread!

I do agree Intel's new CPU's suck. But Intel does not suck. Nor does any of their products, if you dont like a particular processor, keep it to your damn self. Be helpful, try to help the person in need vs. trying to gain AMD another processor sale in hopes of them overtaking Intel.

Somene asks for a good CPU for around $90, say the Barton 2500+. Someone asks for a good CPU for around $150, say the 2.4C. Someone asks who has the best CPU around is, say AMD.
 
I think you mean 15 year olds who game since AMD processors are justifiably quite expensive right now. You're not in kansas anymore toto take a look!

$???? - Intel's 3.46EE 1066FSB LGA775 vs $842 - Athlon 64 FX 55
$438 - Pentium 4 560 3.6GHz LGA775 vs $608 - Athlon 64 3800
$276 - Pentium 4 550 3.4GHz LGA775 vs $316 - Athlon 64 3500 90nm 939pin
$218 - Pentium 4 540 3.2GHz LGA775 vs $215 - Athlon 64 3200 939pin
$178 - Pentium 4 530 3.0GHz LGA775 vs $175 - Athlon 64 3000 939pin
$158 - Pentium 4 520 2.8GHz LGA775 vs $130 - Athlon 64 2800

But edit that out and your post has a lot of substance... thier all good. none sucks. Buy on price/performance.

But you do contridict yourself aweful quick like;

I do agree Intel's new CPU's suck. But Intel does not suck. Nor does any of their products,
Click to expand...

If iNtels new CPU's suck, then at least one of thier product does suck.

hee avalon caught that before me.
 
Due to the expensive nature of computer parts, and the fact that many people will be living with whatever decision they make on those parts for several years, it is inevitable that there will be strong feelings involved with regard to a particular brand that has served someone well.

It has been the case for many years that Intel has enjoyed a dominance of the processor market with very little realistic competition, due to their size and economic clout. This type of relationship with the market is unhealthy for the consumer, because with an absence of competition, a company is free to control the speed of innovation to suit them.

AMD's recent success is important to the processor market because they are providing Intel with the type of real competition that will change the face of personal computing for many years to come. Intel has good processors, but they have enjoyed such freedom with their products that they are developing inefficient and overpriced processors, and continuing to sell them based on their brand recognition and brand loyalty. I, as a consumer in this market, feel that letting others know how important it is for AMD to find success is paramount to continued innovation.

I do not feel that shedding some light on the faults in Intel's newest offering is simply Intel bashing. I feel that it is extolling the virtues of AMD's accomplishment with their Athlon 64 and FX processors, and hoping that Intel will see the need to develop more efficient products in the future.

This type of thought does not always make someone a "15 year old with no money," and it does need and deserve to be said.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top