Intel "Prescott"

[BujinZero]

Curious to see if anyone knows...will the new Intel "Prescott" chip use Socket 478 like the current P4s or will it use something else?

 

[jbond04]

Word on the street has it that it will use Socket 478...but I don't think I can find a place that says that for sure.

 

[BuddyAtBzboyz]

I heard 478 but heck its Intel we are talking about they switch sockets as if they were socks!

 

[mechBgon]

I tried to research that question a while back but got contradictory info, guess we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: jbond04
Word on the street has it that it will use Socket 478...but I don't think I can find a place that says that for sure.

I don't know what "street" people hang out on and talk about CPU's (just kidding )

Seriously, I thought I read somewhere that Prescott would need a new socket, but I'm not sure. Honestly, I don't expect anything until I hear the "official" word from Intel (or unofficial word from a site like AT).

 

[Athlon4all]

Prescott will use Socket 478 and if a 533fsb version is produced, should run on the current crop of P4 mobo's. That is the only thing holding back Prescott compatibility is that it is inclear whether 533fsb vesions will be produced. The High End prescott's will run on Springdale, supporting Dual Channel DDR333 on a 667fsb. Meanwhile, Springdale will support the 533fsb and 400fsb Northwood P4's as well.

Springdale will also feature the new ICH5 with Serial ATA and Integrated Wireless Network. Generally, here's what we're looking at for Prescott:

667fsb
.09 micron
1MB L2 Cache
Hyper-Threading Enabled
Clock Speeds well above 3GHz

I got all my info from here and here

 

[BuddyAtBzboyz]

Nice to know but do you have a source so we can see for ourselves?

 

[BujinZero]

Thanks guys, but Athlon4all's info raises another question for me. Will dual channel DDR require different RAM chips or is it just standard DDR333 operated in a different way by the memory controller? (I haven't really read up on it)

 

[BuddyAtBzboyz]

Dual channel ddr uses the same ram as single channel ddr. Though you may need to get registered ram, I'm not sure on that.

 

[CrazySaint]

Dual channel DDR simply means that instead of having one 64-bit memory channel, you have two. Typically, one DIMM slot will be for one channel, and the other two DIMM slots for the second channel. Ordinary DDR RAM sticks will work fine with it.

 

[Athlon4all]

Dual Channel DDR will not need new sticks. Here's what it will need, it will be just like 850e in that it will need 2 identically sized sticks in order to operate. DC DDR333 will pair up very nicely with Prescott's 667fsb

 

[BujinZero]

Ah I see. So dual channel DDR is like what nVidia does with their nForce chipset(s) . OK, now, speculation time: How does Prescott compare to Hammer, if they really compare at all? (Or are we comparing kiwis (not Apples ) to oranges here?)

 

[Athlon4all]

Prescott vs HAMMMER Prelude:

Hammer will be 30% at least faster than an eqivalently clocked Athlon XP, and hopefully it will launch at 2GHz. Prescott however, it is unclear. 1Meg of L2 Cache could be huge, and it will have a massive 5.4GBs of Memory/fsb bandy, but there's of course how much will Hyper Threading help. It's gonna be tough to tell the other thing is that it is still unclear when wilkl Prescott be launched, and so much of it coudl depend on when Intel's .09 micron process matures to high volume, good yields, etc. Anand in the linjks I provided said that Intel is preparing for a possible Q2'03 Launch of Prescott, but then again, he was hearing at first at IDF this year Q4'03. If it doesnt hit til Q4, then it will hardly be Hammer's initial competition. It will likely be like the Coppermine P3 was against the Athlon. But, if it does indeed hit at Q2'03, ClawHammer could have some very stiff competition early on, and remember, Prescott is gonna scale even quicker than Northwood has (they might move to 300MHz increases at once:Q)

We shall see, both will be great products

 

[Booster]

One thing is for sure --- it may use the same soket, but it'll for sure require a new chipset!

 

[BujinZero]

300MHz increases! Wow, what a far cry from the days of my 8086 (which was clocked at like 8MHz or something ). The future rocks .

 

[imgod2u]

Originally posted by: Athlon4all
Prescott vs HAMMMER Prelude:

Hammer will be 30% at least faster than an eqivalently clocked Athlon XP

Ummm, not quite. AMD has stated that in software that is re-written fully utilizing the 64-bit extensions in Hammer, they ESTIMATE a 20-30% increase. 30% is the maximum AMD expects and CLAIMS and that's only in software that fully utilizes the 64-bit extensions of Hammer. They estimate around 10-15% performance per clock improvement (and by they I mean AMD) in current 32-bit software. And manufacturer's claims are almost always an overestimate. But let's just say for arguements sake that AMD's estimates are correct and it has a 20-30% improvement in a handpicked group of software (none of which is used by the desktop market).

and hopefully it will launch at 2GHz. Prescott however, it is unclear. 1Meg of L2 Cache could be huge, and it will have a massive 5.4GBs of Memory/fsb bandy, but there's of course how much will Hyper Threading help. It's gonna be tough to tell the other thing is that it is still unclear when wilkl Prescott be launched, and so much of it coudl depend on when Intel's .09 micron process matures to high volume, good yields, etc.

Well, Intel has conventionally always been great with ramping up new processing methods. Of course, that's not to say it'll be true in furture cases. However, doubling the cache on the P4 improved its performance on average of about 7-10%. Doubling it again alone would help it. Not to mention the increased memory bandwidth and other unknown enhancements. Now, the doubling of cache and increase in memory bandwidth alone should account for about 10-15% performance per clock improvement which matches Hammer's improvement over the AthlonXP in current code. Hammer will probably have the advantage in software that can be rewritten to utilize its 64-bit extensions but we're unsure as to how well Prescott's double-pumped 32-bit ALU's can work. It may indeed be a match for Hammer's 64-bit integer performance. It's hard to tell whether or not Prescott will own Hammer (in the sense of being significantly faster), but the increase in cache and memory bandwidth alone should mean it can match the performance of Hammer.
The only disadvantage, as you said, is Prescott would probably be released later than Hammer. Hammer is scheduled for early next year to release to the consumer market. While Prescott is rumored to be released in Q2 of next year.

Anand in the linjks I provided said that Intel is preparing for a possible Q2'03 Launch of Prescott, but then again, he was hearing at first at IDF this year Q4'03. If it doesnt hit til Q4, then it will hardly be Hammer's initial competition. It will likely be like the Coppermine P3 was against the Athlon. But, if it does indeed hit at Q2'03, ClawHammer could have some very stiff competition early on, and remember, Prescott is gonna scale even quicker than Northwood has (they might move to 300MHz increases at once:Q)

We shall see, both will be great products

Well, Hammer's release date in volume is rumored to be pushed back to 2003 (early). And as for performance vs the P4, it's still a toss-up. The P4 is scaling very well and at 3.0 GHz, it may indeed be a good competitor for Hammer. I think AMD's real advantage is that finally they have a processor that can compete and probably beat the Xeons in the high-end workstation market. And I'm not just talking about a few percentage here. The workstation market has software that can heavily utilize the use of 64-bit integers and this would mean Hammer could potentially own all Xeons. And the workstation market, if AMD manages to gain ground in it, is a very profitable market. Pricing is not as important in that market so AMD can afford to sell their processors at a high price. Who knows, they may make a huge profit.

 

[BuddyAtBzboyz]

So dual channel DDR is like what nVidia does with their nForce chipset(s)

Not is like, it is the same thing. With the exception that maybe they'll get it right this time. The nforce didn't really take full advantage of what is possible with dual ddr.