Netburst Architecture

[ahock]

Guys;

Do you know when was the first netburst architecture been released? and how long did it held the performance crown. We know K8 was released on 2003 and somehow lasted for 3 years... I'm assuming Core will beat K8 this time.

 

[F1shF4t]

um 2001, and even then it was not the best. Only the high clocked northwoods were the faster than any athlon xps, and i think they held the lead for a year or so.
But beside Northwoods netburst was being beaten by athlon xps and then by athlon 64. In fact since the release of k7, amd has held the lead longer than intel has.

k7 has cought them with their pants down, causing them to go for mhz and netburst, then the athlon 64 was the extra kick which actually made amd competitive and used.

Before that athlon xp were always considered second best, now most shops around where i live sell more amd cpus than intel (mostly semprons actually, i guess they dont have to worry about intel cpu heating up and throtling )

Conroe seem like the cpu thats gonna change things, might be the k7 of intel. We'll se i guess.

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

About the only thing that Netburst can really keep up with the K8 is in vid encoding.
That's why I keep a P4 1.8A (C1 Northwood) @ 3.42GHz around

 

[aka1nas]

The Northwood C was pretty much the only netburst chip that "beat" the equivalent AthlonXP, especially when you factored in price. The original Willamette core was pretty pathetic, being both very expensive and not even being faster than higher end model P3s until you got around 1.8Ghz and above. Northwood B was better, but the AthlonXPs still clobbered it at the same PR rating and even more at the same pricepoint.

Northwood C came out around the time of Barton(prob a few months before IIRC) and the K7 architecture had trouble scaling much past 2.2Ghz. The extra features they added, like a 400(200x2)Mhz FSB as well as extra L2 cache didn't really help out the K7 that much in real-world performance and the later PR ratings did not match up well to the corresponding Northwood Cs.

 

[F1shF4t]

Originally posted by: aka1nas
The Northwood C was pretty much the only netburst chip that "beat" the equivalent AthlonXP, especially when you factored in price. The original Willamette core was pretty pathetic, being both very expensive and not even being faster than higher end model P3s until you got around 1.8Ghz and above. Northwood B was better, but the AthlonXPs still clobbered it at the same PR rating and even more at the same pricepoint.

Northwood C came out around the time of Barton(prob a few months before IIRC) and the K7 architecture had trouble scaling much past 2.2Ghz. The extra features they added, like a 400(200x2)Mhz FSB as well as extra L2 cache didn't really help out the K7 that much in real-world performance and the later PR ratings did not match up well to the corresponding Northwood Cs.

Yea the p4c 2.8ghz matched the 3200+ athlon xp in most stuff, where the 3.0ghz p4C was faster at most things.

 

[ahock]

Willamete is the first netburst right? was this a flop?

 

[aka1nas]

Yeah it was the first gen. I think they sold ok still as it was Intel and was marketed heavily. They were very expensive at release, had little to no SSE-optimized software available, and either ran on SD-RAM (which completely killed it's performance as netburst has always been bandwith hungry) or dual-channel RD-RAM, which was pretty fast at the time but pretty expensive.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: ahock
Willamete is the first netburst right? was this a flop?

Yep, williamete first, then northwood, then prescott, and finaly cedar mill.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: WhoBeDaPlaya
About the only thing that Netburst can really keep up with the K8 is in vid encoding.
That's why I keep a P4 1.8A (C1 Northwood) @ 3.42GHz around

Wow... nice oc dude. Very nice.

Originally posted by: ahock
Willamete is the first netburst right? was this a flop?

Yea it was pretty garbage, i bought one. The first one ever released was a 1.3ghz model, which a 1.0 or 1.1 ghz PIII could match. The first few willamettes only started to edge out the PIII 1.4S tualatin at around 1.8+ghz. Then northwood came alond and sorted it all out. Also the wilamettes used RDRAM which for some reason never caught on and stayed expensive, so northwoods started using DDR RAM instead, making them more popular.

 

[Maximilian]

Originally posted by: stevty2889

Originally posted by: ahock
Willamete is the first netburst right? was this a flop?

Yep, williamete first, then northwood, then prescott, and finaly cedar mill.

Cedar mills really just a dual core 65nm prescott.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: Soviet

Originally posted by: stevty2889

Originally posted by: ahock
Willamete is the first netburst right? was this a flop?

Yep, williamete first, then northwood, then prescott, and finaly cedar mill.

Cedar mills really just a dual core 65nm prescott.

No, Cedar Mill is a single core 65nm prescott, Presler is 2 cedar mill die packaged together as a dual core. They do run a good bit cooler than prescotts though.

 

[Aluvus]

Originally posted by: ahock
Willamete is the first netburst right? was this a flop?

Yes and yes. Born on January 3, 2001.

Originally posted by: stevty2889

Originally posted by: ahock
Willamete is the first netburst right? was this a flop?

Yep, williamete first, then northwood, then prescott, and finaly cedar mill.

There were also various Xeons and the Pentium D series.

 

[ahock]

so basically pentium4 succes was with nothwood only? how long did it held the performance crown? We know also that when K8 was released, it didn't capture the crown right away after several steppings. Am I correct?

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: Aluvus

Originally posted by: ahock
Willamete is the first netburst right? was this a flop?

Yes and yes. Born on January 3, 2001.

Originally posted by: stevty2889

Originally posted by: ahock
Willamete is the first netburst right? was this a flop?

Yep, williamete first, then northwood, then prescott, and finaly cedar mill.

There were also various Xeons and the Pentium D series.

November 20, 2000 for NetBurst Introduction.

 

[coldpower27]

Originally posted by: ahock
so basically pentium4 succes was with nothwood only? how long did it held the performance crown? We know also that when K8 was released, it didn't capture the crown right away after several steppings. Am I correct?

It also depends on what you mean by "success"? Having the performance crown doesn't equate to success necessarily.

 

[aka1nas]

Originally posted by: coldpower27

Originally posted by: ahock
so basically pentium4 succes was with nothwood only? how long did it held the performance crown? We know also that when K8 was released, it didn't capture the crown right away after several steppings. Am I correct?

It also depends on what you mean by "success"? Having the performance crown doesn't equate to success necessarily.

Very true, Intel hasn't had much of a problem selling any of the P4 incarnations as they have had a stranglehold on all the major vendors such as Dell and HP until more recently. Also, the "Mhz Myth" is a pretty effective marketting tool and as most consumers don't really need the performance of a modern cpu anyway they probably didn't have a clue nor care that they were paying more for a slower chip.