P4 EE are finally appearing

[Spicedaddy]

Link


Box looks nice

 

[Shimmishim]

zipzoomfly.com has them for sale already

 

[DragonFire]

Did You Know that if your current PIV mobo can't handle a Prescott electrically/thermally, it surely isn't going to be able to handle an EE,

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: DragonFire
Did You Know that if your current PIV mobo can't handle a Prescott electrically/thermally, it surely isn't going to be able to handle an EE,

Link that please!!!! I hadn't heard any such thing...The P4EE should be nothing more then a current northwood p4 .13micron with added l3 cache like the xeons...Nothing new here...This shouldn't have any of the great new features of the prescott so I don't see where it is going to be such a departure from current 3.2ghz p4c chips....

 

[DragonFire]

Sorry about that, heres the LINK

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: DragonFire
Did You Know that if your current PIV mobo can't handle a Prescott electrically/thermally, it surely isn't going to be able to handle an EE,

<office space manager> Ummm, yeah... </office space manager>

That's not true. The P4EE will work in any 800fsb P4 board.

 

[DragonFire]

Dont lay the messanger out on a bare Xp core to fry. I just happen to see an artical the other day and then saw this post and thought someone would find in enlightning!

I really dont care since I have an AMD system and while not real world, I like seeing my Sandra 2004 cpu number rank a little higher then a P4 2.8 dual system and complete on do a P4-C 3.2Ghz. Please no freaking flames, Im just stating my freaking option about what I see and like!

 

[Duvie]

Well then I guess most quality boards a lot of ATers use will be able to handle the p4ee....Take a look at the ample reviews of the p4ee done now and when the athlon64 was launched and you will see many boards (i875) were used and I didn't hear one instance of reviewers having issues or not getting it to run on particular boards....

Edit: Yeah in that worthless benchmark I score 10303mips/7273mflops.....and that is not a dual cpu system but a HT enabled system....

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: DragonFire
Dont lay the messanger out on a bare Xp core to fry. I just happen to see atrical the other day and then saw this post and thought someone would find in enlightning!

I really dont care since I have an AMD system and while not real world, I like seeing my Sandra 2004 cpu number rank a little higher then a P4 2.8 dual system and complete on do a P4-C 3.2Ghz. Please no freaking flames, Im just stating my freaking option about what I see and like!

I'm not flaming you at all... Sorry if I sounded like it. (I thought the office space reference lightened the mood. ) At any rate, I was just trying to clear up the false statement.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: DragonFire
Did You Know that if your current PIV mobo can't handle a Prescott electrically/thermally, it surely isn't going to be able to handle an EE,

<office space manager> Ummm, yeah... </office space manager>

That's not true. The P4EE will work in any 800fsb P4 board.

Agreed. From what ive seen is the varience in voltage that makes I865/I875/SiS655/SiS655FX motherboards incompatible with prescott. Because the .09 process is more venerable to volatage spikes and dips that could cause damage to the core. Hence the updated standard on voltage regulators on prescott motherboards. Its actually not a current-draw or heat related issue.

Edit: Spelling

 

[DragonFire]

Umm Duvie, your scores are higher the a P4-C dual 3.2Ghz.......Hows it worthless? but like I said I know its not real wolrd.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: DragonFire
Umm Duvie, your scores are higher the a P4-C dual 3.2Ghz.......Hows it worthless? but like I said I know its not real wolrd.

That is right!!! When I drop my fsb to 246fsb to be 3.2ghz I score almost identical to the 3.2ghz (2 smt)....I do not think it s for dual processors or it would say xeon and not p4c since the p4c chip is not meant to run in dual configuration. The smt just means multithreaded and HT enabled apps will list my computer as having 2 logical cpus but not 2 physical cpus....2 xeons with HT are actually seen as 4 logical cpus and 2 physical cpus....


It is worthless cause it often does not equate to real world performance so it becomes a mine is bigger then yours and the ppl obsess on getting higher scores instead of just using the pc......I run it once or twice just to see if my tweaks and ocing is gaining or starting to return diminishing results.....Other than that you want ever see me list those numbers in reviews....


Edit: I do see that the 2.8ghz (2smt) list it as a p4b chip so it may be dual cpu and therefore appears that sissoft is the only program which treats 2 logical cpus as 2 physical cpus in results, which leads to my statement how worthless sissoft results are since we know that cannot possibly be true.....Still only sanctioned daul intel p4 systems are Xeons and not p4c's or p4b's so just a bunch of theoretical numbers....

 

[DragonFire]

Thank you for filling me in on the whole HT thing as I been Intel stupid since the PII days. I would never start comparing those numbers with other people. I just kind like to see my 2.3Ghz XP score a high then there P4 3.2Ghz score..


In real world stuff, the scores would be true in some apps but not others, I know how it is. But to really end the Intel VS Amd crap . I think one needs to take two cpus clocked at the same speed, same memory speed, same FSB, no HT, no SSE/2/3, no 3Dnow......not even MMX. Then see how things turn out. Or am I just full of it and complete idiot?

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: DragonFire
Thank you for filling me in on the whole HT thing as I been Intel stupid since the PII days. I would never start comparing those numbers with other people. I just kind like to see my 2.3Ghz XP score a high then there P4 3.2Ghz score..


In real world stuff, the scores would be true in some apps but not others, I know how it is. But to really end the Intel VS Amd crap . I think one needs to take two cpus clocked at the same speed, same memory speed, same FSB, no HT, no SSE/2/3, no 3Dnow......not even MMX. Then see how things turn out. Or am I just full of it and complete idiot?

that is only comparing the efficiencies of the processor architecture and will bring you to the conclusion most of us already know and agree with...AMD has a higher IPC (instruction per clock)...therefore more gets done and thus amd does well with much lower clock speed....However Intel no fualt to anyone decided to go with a longer pipeline for higher speed ramping but lower IPC. Don't then hamper them by taking away HT, SSE2, and MMX....Consider those as much as part of the architecture as anything else....

Most realworld apps will not turn those off and you really would only be hand tieing the intel...The fact is INtel uses them to garner more speed and the fact is JOe Blow consumer doesn't care how computer company A or B does it just that it gets done and in the fastest amount of time.

We really should not try to cross compare this platforms anyways...It has been muddled with amd pr rating flip flopping around so much and Intel enhancing their chips with higher and higher fsb and features like HT but not using a pr rating system...remember when a xp 1800+ was faster then a willamette 2.0ghz p4??? Then came 512kb of l2, and then 533fsb, and then 800fsb and HT and now a 3200+ xp is an embarrasment to compare to a 3.2c...we know it as being more comparable to a 2.8c yet Intel doesn't call the 2.8c a 3200+....So lets not try to compare them it is too hard and the results vary per type of program.

 

[DragonFire]

Yes SIR! Sorry if I might have started something. Been up for over a day and not really thinking before posting. I'm curious, what might happen it take all the stuff away and then somehow make both chips have the same length pipeline?

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: DragonFire
Yes SIR! Sorry if I might have started something. Been up for over a day and not really thinking before posting. I'm curious, what might happen it take all the stuff away and then somehow make both chips have the same length pipeline?

I imagine the architectures would be so similar that they would perform rather close to one another like the old days. )pre P4, maybe pre pentium mmx days).....

I like the differences...It shows there is more then one way to get it done, and right now amd may be the future if intl can't fix its heat and power issues...I think Intel needs to start looking at more ipc and less speed as it is only ramping the heat and power need IMO....I also like the idea of HT and maybe more and more dual processor systems for average users with dual and quad channel memory feeding those dual cpu systems.....I think the rapid pace of the speed in ghz is going to hit this physical limits soon without some major technological break throughs and all of us running N2 systems!!!

 

[DragonFire]

You know.....3Ghz is silly.......4Ghz next year is silly. Even with a 15,000 rpm scsi drive I would think the cpu wastes more time waiting for data then anything else. Then need to forget clockspeed, focus on getting more work done per cycle, try to get the FSB to run at least hald the cpus speed. I think tho the most improtant is something needs to be done with Hard drives......Kinda makes me made that SATA drivers are sill using slow 7200 rpms when they should be 10k+ and at the same time they need to work ongetting scsi to 20-25K.

I can only hope one day we have computer like those from the Starship Enterprise-E..where you talk to them, they fix themselves almost always........could crack RC5-72 in 5 seconds and above all, Its not running any MS programs at all!

 

[DragonFire]

LOL.....went from P4 EE's showing up to show cpu work, what we would like to see done.....to how they HT works.....opppps

A little off topic!

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Shimmishim
zipzoomfly.com has them for sale already

Out of stock. $1059!!!!:Q:Q Is it capable of accurately simulating a nuclear blast now?

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: DragonFire
Thank you for filling me in on the whole HT thing as I been Intel stupid since the PII days. I would never start comparing those numbers with other people. I just kind like to see my 2.3Ghz XP score a high then there P4 3.2Ghz score..


In real world stuff, the scores would be true in some apps but not others, I know how it is. But to really end the Intel VS Amd crap . I think one needs to take two cpus clocked at the same speed, same memory speed, same FSB, no HT, no SSE/2/3, no 3Dnow......not even MMX. Then see how things turn out. Or am I just full of it and complete idiot?

Because that's not a comparison? And there are no Dual P4Cs, 2.4ghz, 3.2ghz, or otherwise. P4Cs don't run two to a board. Just because you say you aren't interested in an Intel vs. AMD flame doesn't mean that you aren't actively promoting it, as you are.

BTW, way to run your overclocked XP against a stock speed P4. Big man.

 

[ArborBarber]

Jeff7...
Ya... like that? $1059? I said the same thing...well $700+ for the AMD64fx, it's all pretty relevant...it's called marketting! Don't play the game right now, hang in there for a bit if you're thinking about upgrading your proc. Although, it wouldn't be a bad thing to contribute to the AMD camp...life would truly suck if AMD blows this release and leaves Intel the only cpu manufacture out there standing...maybe I'll build my first AMD system...from what I've read, both Intel and AMD are going to keep prices pretty high for both their high end chips. By keeping down the number of chips produced they'll both keep prices at a premium. If the FX comes down drastically in price that should send up a red flag to all of us, at that point it might be wise for all of us to build a AMD system. I've always built Intel systems, but if it appears that AMD might go under, I'll contribute to their cause for sure...I know what it use to be like having Intel dictate their upgrade road(not to mention pricing.) AMD helps keep Intel honest. God Bless AMD! Happy Thanksgiving all !