• 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.

Anand has a prescott?

R

rgreen83

Senior member
Anand's new review of the 9800xt and nv38 state that the hardware is tested on a prescott platform, at the bottom here. No other mention is made, now if Anand has a prescott, why is he holding back on us. I would rather see the benchmarks on a new processor core than very minor speed bumps for the same graphics cards weve already seen. Please, Anand fill us in!
 
Sorry, again, Ive been reading AT daily for about 2 years but I just dont check who writes the articles. Where did Evan confirm that they have a prescott? and does he say why they havent given us any info, like when to expect release/review?
 
A quick comparison of some of the benchmarks they used in the A64 review (using the same video card - the Radeon 9800 pro 256) confirms that at 2.8 ghz, the prescott gets owned.
 
Originally posted by: rgreen83
Sorry, again, Ive been reading AT daily for about 2 years but I just dont check who writes the articles. Where did Evan confirm that they have a prescott? and does he say why they havent given us any info, like when to expect release/review?
Click to expand...

Evan himself. Sadly with the NDA he cannot say much other than confirm it was a Prescott.
 
Originally posted by: bgeh
apparently there are 3 speed versions
the 3.2, 3.0 and 2.8
Click to expand...

and 3.4 GHz, obviously
*edit* Doesn't Anandtech has a policy of reviewing videocards with the fastest processor possible so as to try to minimize CPU bottlenecks? If so, it would be an interesting choice of CPU. Comparing the scores to the A64's review, the Prescott 2.8 GHz is definitely slower than the 2.0 GHz A64, assuming the settings were the same on both tests. We'll see once we get the formal review.
 
I will say it's definately a Prescott and Anand gives it away here.

Just highlight the hardware test platform. It will highlight the word "Prescott" next to the word processor.

There you are.
 
Originally posted by: CPUtrader
I will say it's definately a Prescott and Anand gives it away here.

Just highlight the hardware test platform. It will highlight the word "Prescott" next to the word processor.

There you are.
Click to expand...


it only says "2.8GHz Intel Processor" i see no indication of prescott...and if it is a prescott he is using the i875P intel board??? i though 875 won't work?

EDIT:UNLESS ITS A NEW 875 BOARD FROM INTEL
 
Originally posted by: SuPrEIVIE
Originally posted by: CPUtrader
I will say it's definately a Prescott and Anand gives it away here.

Just highlight the hardware test platform. It will highlight the word "Prescott" next to the word processor.

There you are.
Click to expand...


it only says "2.8GHz Intel Processor" i see no indication of prescott...and if it is a prescott he is using the i875P intel board??? i though 875 won't work?

EDIT:UNLESS ITS A NEW 875 BOARD FROM INTEL
Click to expand...
"Prescott" is in a white font right after "Processor". Use your curser to hightlight it and it will magically appear.
 
Originally posted by: redpriest_
A quick comparison of some of the benchmarks they used in the A64 review (using the same video card - the Radeon 9800 pro 256) confirms that at 2.8 ghz, the prescott gets owned.
Click to expand...

i don't get why people say things like this...

do you do it to start a big flame war?

everyone knows already that the A64 is a GREAT chip... what's the point of making statements like the one you make...

anyway...

good news to hear that prescott is starting to come out to those super cool people...

🙂
 
hehe, when i started this thread it did say prescott, CPUtrader *edit* (and the venerable Wingznut) are *edit* right that it is still there but they changed it to a white font. tricky, tricky....

I hope Anand or Evan will let us know something about its performance before its official release, as that isnt until late november/early december says the Ink.

My guess is that it is only 2.8ghz because it is an engineering sample meant for quality testing, not meant to represent final shipping product, so it doesnt need to be a 3.4 or whatever.
 
People should be so negative to the initial Prescott reports.

Don't expect much out of Prescott until the shrink to 90nm.
 
Originally posted by: MadRat
People should be so negative to the initial Prescott reports.

Don't expect much out of Prescott until the shrink to 90nm.
Click to expand...

The Prescott has always been at 90nm. It was designed and will be manufactured on that process.
 
Originally posted by: jbond04
Originally posted by: MadRat
People should be so negative to the initial Prescott reports.

Don't expect much out of Prescott until the shrink to 90nm.
Click to expand...

The Prescott has always been at 90nm. It was designed and will be manufactured on that process.
Click to expand...
jbond is correct about 90nm... Also, all "initial reports" are based on a pre-production stepping. And as rgreen83 pointed out, these samples are only meant to quality test setups (compatibility, power, etc.)

No different than when "initial reports" showed that Hammer would fail to meet expectations.
 
90nm, really? The internal bandwidth of the Prescott should set it way apart from the older Pentium-4. They probably got the thing crippled, Celeron-style, as far as connections and associativity to the internal caches.
 
Originally posted by: MadRat
90nm, really? The internal bandwidth of the Prescott should set it way apart from the older Pentium-4. They probably got the thing crippled, Celeron-style, as far as connections and associativity to the internal caches.
Click to expand...
Where do you come up with such wacky ideas?
 
Originally posted by: MadRat
90nm, really? The internal bandwidth of the Prescott should set it way apart from the older Pentium-4. They probably got the thing crippled, Celeron-style, as far as connections and associativity to the internal caches.
Click to expand...

😕
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top