excitement over Intel P4 Extreme Edition

[bigpow]

2.5MB of internal cache running 800MHz on the FSB
with HT

Damn!

When will AMD Super T-Bred arrive?

 

[Regs]

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: bigpow
2.5MB of internal cache running 800MHz on the FSB
with HT

Damn!

When will AMD Super T-Bred arrive?

Actually, the L2 and L3 is on die, 512KB/2048KB, respectively. They run at full speed (3Ghz = 3Ghz cache). Since its inclusive, all the L2 cache will be duplicated on the L3, so technically its only 1536KB effective L3 cache.

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: bigpow
2.5MB of internal cache running 800MHz on the FSB
with HT

Damn!

When will AMD Super T-Bred arrive?

It already did a while ago. It's called the Barton. I wouldn't get too exited about these chips. They're just rebadged Xeon MPs and will carry the Xeon MP price tag as well.

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: MonkeyDriveExpress
They're just rebadged Xeon MPs and will carry the Xeon MP price tag as well.

So... You are going on record and predicting that the P4-EE will cost a few thousand dollars??? Would you like to put any money on that?


Monkey, you are admittedly an AMD zealot, and obviously dislike Intel. (Why, I am not sure.) However, posting as if you know something, when you really haven't a clue, isn't a good idea.

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: MonkeyDriveExpress
They're just rebadged Xeon MPs and will carry the Xeon MP price tag as well.

So... You are going on record and predicting that the P4-EE will cost a few thousand dollars??? Would you like to put any money on that?


Monkey, you are admittedly an AMD zealot, and obviously dislike Intel. (Why, I am not sure.) However, posting as if you know something, when you really haven't a clue, isn't a good idea.

Monkey, if you look at its pricing, you'll notice its priced side by side with the Athlon FX pricing.

 

[peter7921]

I'm not too excited with this announcement, especially when prescott is right around the corner.

The only thing good i see, is it gives people like me more upgrade options.

 

[50]

So how much (%) advantage will this bring over a 3.2c vrs 3.2 Extreme edition. Will it be worth intel's crazy price tag?

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Cartman2003
So how much (%) advantage will this bring over a 3.2c vrs 3.2 Extreme edition. Will it be worth intel's crazy price tag?

I bet, No. I don't think I'll be upgrading.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: MonkeyDriveExpress

It already did a while ago. It's called the Barton. I wouldn't get too exited about these chips. They're just rebadged Xeon MPs and will carry the Xeon MP price tag as well.

http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.html?i=1870

According to Anand's article, its priced at $740 per 1000, which is ~20% more expensive than the 3.2C is currently.

 

[boyRacer]

Originally posted by: peter7921
I'm not too excited with this announcement, especially when prescott is right around the corner.

The only thing good i see, is it gives people like me more upgrade options.

It's to ruin AMD's party next week. That's all it is.

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: MonkeyDriveExpress
They're just rebadged Xeon MPs and will carry the Xeon MP price tag as well.

So... You are going on record and predicting that the P4-EE will cost a few thousand dollars??? Would you like to put any money on that?


Monkey, you are admittedly an AMD zealot, and obviously dislike Intel. (Why, I am not sure.) However, posting as if you know something, when you really haven't a clue, isn't a good idea.

Geez, I'm just regurgitating what I've read. There's a first time for everyone to be wrong . And yes, I am an 'AMD zealot,' but I don't dislike Intel. I just see AMD as a better value for me right now. I had a little more respect for you before this but intentionally steering this towards a flame war is just stupid. Of all the tech company employees in the forums, you decide not to sit back, play it cool, and help people with your products, you try to elevate yours, not let its merits speak for the product. Good job, now I do actually hate Intel.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: MonkeyDriveExpress

Geez, I'm just regurgitating what I've read.

Of all the tech company employees in the forums, you decide not to sit back, play it cool, and help people with your products, you try to elevate yours, not let its merits speak for the product. Good job, now I do actually hate Intel.

No, you're not regurgitating what you've read. Since the pricing clearly says in AT's article as $740, you're either spreading FUD/BS or are legally blind.

I dont remember seeing any P4-EE benchmarks, so where the hell are the merits you speak of?

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: dexvx

Originally posted by: MonkeyDriveExpress

Geez, I'm just regurgitating what I've read.

Of all the tech company employees in the forums, you decide not to sit back, play it cool, and help people with your products, you try to elevate yours, not let its merits speak for the product. Good job, now I do actually hate Intel.

No, you're not regurgitating what you've read. Since the pricing clearly says in AT's article as $740, you're either spreading FUD/BS or are legally blind.

I dont remember seeing any P4-EE benchmarks, so where the hell are the merits you speak of?

I wasn't responding to you, I was responding to Wingznut. Nice job insulting me like a three year old. I SAID I WAS WRONG. Read posts before you needlessly and idiotically flame.

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: dexvx

Originally posted by: MonkeyDriveExpress

Geez, I'm just regurgitating what I've read.

Of all the tech company employees in the forums, you decide not to sit back, play it cool, and help people with your products, you try to elevate yours, not let its merits speak for the product. Good job, now I do actually hate Intel.

No, you're not regurgitating what you've read. Since the pricing clearly says in AT's article as $740, you're either spreading FUD/BS or are legally blind.

I dont remember seeing any P4-EE benchmarks, so where the hell are the merits you speak of?

Sorry if I was a bit harsh, Monkey... It just seems as though you were going out of your way to say something that wasn't true.

 

[MDE]

Now why would I do something like that :evil:? I do think that the prices of the A64s are ridiculous, as well as the P4 Extreme Edition (I even capitalized the whole thing!). In my mind the only people that would buy one of those chips right now are the people that are trying to overclock Xeons and Opterons (again, ridiculous in my mind).

 

[bendixG15]

Enough already
Take it outside

 

[SgtZulu]

I won't get excited until Newegg is selling them for $150

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: bendixG15
Enough already
Take it outside

It's already solved big guy.

 

[draggoon01]

it's like cars.

pentium = accord

celeron = civic

xeon = nsx

except now we have accord ex = p4 EE


more and more computers are like a commodity. and like cars, values drop faster than you wish. and instead of commercials of suv's driving over mountains and through forests, geeks gawk over benchmarks...

now where's the athlon64 reviews already...

 

[Shad0hawK]

It's to ruin AMD's party next week. That's all it is.

probobly not, at 11 Ops per clock it will take more than more cache to make up for the p4's 6 ops per clock.

 

[OddTSi]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
probobly not, at 11 Ops per clock it will take more than more cache to make up for the p4's 6 ops per clock.

Someone please, for the love of god, explain to me why AMD fanatics ALWAYS say that AMD chips are better because they have higher IPC?

I'm sure if Intel fanatics came out and said "at 3.2GHz, it'll take more than 64-bit processing for AMD to make up for its 2GHz" AMD guys would be the first to come out and say "MHz isn't everything". So what makes the IPC situation ANY different? Is it just that AMD fanatics like being hypocrites? Seriously, someone explain it to me.

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: OddTSi


Someone please, for the love of god, explain to me why AMD fanatics ALWAYS say that AMD chips are better because they have higher IPC?

I'm sure if Intel fanatics came out and said "at 3.2GHz, it'll take more than 64-bit processing for AMD to make up for its 2GHz" AMD guys would be the first to come out and say "MHz isn't everything". So what makes the IPC situation ANY different? Is it just that AMD fanatics like being hypocrites? Seriously, someone explain it to me.

it is not a matter of "fanaticism" real world performance bears this out in a mhz to mhz comparision. i am sorry this annoys you. i really do not know a gentler way to explain it other than to say opinion does not change objective reality. can you perhaps explain why a chip doing almost twice the amount of calculations per clock AND with the mempry controller onboard will not be faster? ipc is a big factor along with clock speed and FSB speed.

we know Mhz, IPC, and FSB are the 3 major factors generally that together to determine overall system performance, intel has higher FSB, higher MhZ. what in the world could be making the difference that makes AMD chips faster mhz to mhz with slowers FSB speed? how is it fanaticism or hypocrasy when it is an observable phenomena witnessed countless times?

i have never seen in as similarly equiped machines intel win in a mhz to mhz comparison, if you have links could you provide them? i would dearly love to see them.

 

[MDE]

We just stopped a mini flame war... please don't start another.

 

[Sohcan]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

It's to ruin AMD's party next week. That's all it is.

probobly not, at 11 Ops per clock it will take more than more cache to make up for the p4's 6 ops per clock.

First of all, the Athlon's dispatch rate is 9 micro-ops per cycle.

Second of all, both the Athlon and P4 sustain a maximum of 3 uops/cycle, bounded by their instruction rename, issue and retire rate. The instruction dispatch rate is hardly an categorical measure of microprocessor performance, especially when you consider that the P4 has a higher integer dispatch rate (4 int ops/cycle on the P4 vs. 3/cycle on the Athlon) and that the total instruction dispatch rate on the P3 was 5 uops/cycle.

If pinning down microprocessor performance was as easy as solidifying a single statistic, my line of work would be so much easier.

And if you think the trade-off between clock cycle time and CPI is new with the P4, you might want to revisit the early 1990's when the Alpha 21064 and 21164 had a 2x to 3x clock rate lead over the lower CPI HP PA-RISC and IBM POWER designs.

i have never seen in as similarly equiped machines intel win in a mhz to mhz comparison, if you have links could you provide them? i would dearly love to see them.

Not that it's the norm, but it does happen. Lightwave