Pentium 4 3.6 Ghz @ Tomshardware

[Leon]

Link

Also, he had overclocked XP @ 2666Mhz (3300+) in review as well.

Leon

 

[BD231]

:Q

 

[Budman]

 

[Insane3D]

I think Budman is PWI...

 

[BFG10K]

Nice but I wish he would have included many more 3D gaming benchmarks. That kind of power is just wasted in a review otherwise.

 

[BFG10K]

Looks like you need a 3 GHz processor to break 60 FPS in Commanche4. Good lord. :Q

 

[UlricT]

haha... check out the "3D Rendering: Cinema 4D XL 7.303 " chart! It shows the overclocked Athlon going faster that the p4, but then the reviewer claims: "similar result is produced in the Cinema test: the 3.6 GHz P4 is in the lead. " LOL!!!

Just shows how good they are.....

 

[CTho9305]

so, there wont be any design changes up to 3.6 ghz, and he just reviewed all the speeds between now and that release. Who wants to be on whether he will still review them again as each speed "officially" gets released?

 

[Budman]

So much for any cpu over 3ghz needing a new mobo,he used an Asus P4T533-C (Intel 850E chipset) Revision: 1.01

 

[BFG10K]

but then the reviewer claims: "similar result is produced in the Cinema test: the 3.6 GHz P4 is in the lead. " LOL!!!

I wonder if they just got the graph labelling mixed up.

 

[Pabster]

Looking good, although I still believe DDR is here to stay and dual-channel DDR is where Intel is heading.

 

[Athlon4all]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Looking good, although I still believe DDR is here to stay and dual-channel DDR is where Intel is heading.

Or more specifically, DDR-2, I think there is little arguement that Dual-Channel DDR is simply a stop point to provide sufficent bandy forr Prescott's 667fsb before ddr-2

 

[Mrburns2007]

To bad you can't buy a hammer or 3.6 P4 now. The comparison shows that if the hammer is even half good it will easily out perform a p4 at 3.6 but at what cost ?

If the hammer is uber expensive it won't matter to 99% of the computer users, they'll stay with the affordable athlon xp.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Athlon4all

Originally posted by: Pabster
Looking good, although I still believe DDR is here to stay and dual-channel DDR is where Intel is heading.

Or more specifically, DDR-2, I think there is little arguement that Dual-Channel DDR is simply a stop point to provide sufficent bandy forr Prescott's 667fsb before ddr-2

i pretty sure that ddr 2 is little more than a signalling upgrade, dual channel would still be best.

 

[SexyK]

In his comparison chart there, he shows Prescott with 512k L2 cache. I was under the impression it would have a 1MB L2 cache, can anyone confirm or deny? I know there is no definite data out there yet, but anyone heard through the grapevine? I think it would make sense to go to 1MB with the .09u process.

Kramer

 

[Dug]

Now I feel slow again.

 

[BLiT45]

It's too bad he didn't chuck in a couple of benchmarks that included the Radeon 9700 pro, but instead he stuck to that OLD NEWS Ti4600... Would have loved to see what the 3Dmark would have been then, plus some of the other gaming benchmarks...but I know he had to keep it even across the board.

 

[Varun]

Reading that article I kept wondering, why is he reviewing this processor when he states it won't be released for 10 months? We all know the hammer is coming out soon, and the Barton has double the cache of the XP. Sure it'c cool to see what it will be like, but he keeps stating, yup, still at the Top! Well of course it is. The P4 2800 is at the top of all benchmarks right now, if the 3600 wasn't something would be pretty wrong.

I don't know, it seems a bit crazy to review/preview something that is that far away yet. There will be a lot of changes in motherboards, memory and video cards by then.

 

[GTaudiophile]

You'd think a few years had passed since I bought my P4 2.0A in January!!! Geez...

The P4 scales like a mofo. Intel must be worried about Hammer!

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Varun
Reading that article I kept wondering, why is he reviewing this processor when he states it won't be released for 10 months? We all know the hammer is coming out soon, and the Barton has double the cache of the XP.

Tom included the 3.06 GHz P4 which should be here in 2 months - is this too long of a stretch for you? I certainly like to be able to plan my purchases ahead a little, and 2 months isn't too far in the future for anything major to change my conclusions.

He also benchmarked the 3.33 GHz P4 which should be here in the first half of 2003. Tom did an XP overclocked to 3400+ speed as well. The Hammer is supposed to debut at roughly 3400+ speed, so this article is a great estimation of the comparison of the top AMD and Intel chips we will see in the coming months. Sure the 3400+ Hammer will perform differently than a 3400+ XP on individual benchmarks, this is to be expected. But on average the 3400+ Hammer should perform about the same as the 3400+ XP (If they didn't perform about the same then AMD would really need to adjust one of the Performance Ratings or be in a pickle selling two similar names, Athlon XP 3400+ and Athlon Hammer 3400+, with drastically different performances. Thus the Hammer's integrated memory controller, cache, and other optimizations are already included in the 3400+ PR name). In 1st quarter or 2nd quarter of 2003 we can buy a 3.33 GHz P4 or a 3400+ Hammer - I'll let you decide from Tom's data which you'd rather have.

As for the 3.6 GHz benchmark 10 months in advance, this is still of some use. It lets people today know if they should buy a 2.8 GHz P4 or wait nearly a year to get Tom's reported 7% to 29% speed boost. To me, I'd never wait nearly a year for a 7% to 29% boost. Thus I think now is a good time to buy. If Tom reported a 129% speed boost my conclusion would be completely different. Sure I admit that some things might change in the next year - so that 29% figure might need adjusting over time. But it still is the best estimate we have at the moment.

 

[dexvx]

Quite interesting that the P4 still scales nearly linearly in some benchmarksat 3.6Ghz. I wonder what kind of cooling tom is using. If its a standard intel hs/fan, then thats very impressive.

Also note that the Athlon XP is scaling quite poorly. So the 3400+ 2666/166 Athlon probably WONT be rated at 3400+. AMD has already demoted their PR rating at approximately 2Ghz, and if thats how a 3400+ will perform, no reason to believe that they will demote it again. But the Barton with 512KB cache should offer better performance clock for clock.

Tom used a regular Asus P4T533-C, so looks like no new mobo will be required.

 

[dullard]

Also note that the Athlon XP is scaling quite poorly. So the 3400+ 2666/166 Athlon probably WONT be rated at 3400+. AMD has already demoted their PR rating at approximately 2Ghz, and if thats how a 3400+ will perform, no reason to believe that they will demote it again.

I see what you are saying. However, Intel went from 256 kB to 512 kB cache, went from 400 MHz to 533 MHz fsb, and introduced a small speed bump with their C1 stepping and all AMD did was adjust their PR by 100+. I agree that AMD might have to adjust the PR again by the time it goes from 2600+ to 3400+. However if all those improvements by Intel only warranted a 100+ adjustment, then don't expect a large adjustment if and when AMD releases 2666/166 Athlon or equivalent. So maybe the name will be 3300+ instead of 3400+. I won't argue about a 10% change in a future CPU but it still shows that the 3400+ Hammer will have a major uphill fight. The rumored 4000+ Hammer that will be released shortly after the 3400+ Hammer will have a much better chance of success.

 

[microAmp]

And this site says it's a fake.

Original link, not translated.

 

[mk52]

also dont forget: starting with P4@3Ghz hyperthreading will be enabled.

 

[dexvx]

And the fact that as XP's grow in clock speed, they are limited by their FSB. At 133 DDR FSB, it barely provides the memory bandwidth for 2600+ processors. This is reminiscent of the Tualatins. They have huge processing power, but their 133Mhz FSB limits their memory bandwidth and thus overall performance. With a 512KB Cache and 166 DDR FSB it should in some ways counter the effect of the bandwidth liimitation by reducing the need to access system memory.

Regardless, the IPC for the Pentium4 is going up and the IPC for the XP's are currently are going down with increasing clock speed. I'd expect a 3400+ Hammer to outperform the 3333 / 133 Pentium4 on most all occasions, not like the overclocked 3400+ (2666/166) which barely competes with a 3066 /133 Pentium4.

I wont comment on Hyperthreading, because thats a hit or miss depending on application, from what I've currently read (which is outdated because there are no new hyperthreading articles). Although I would imagine it would perform very well when you're multitasking, which most of us do anyways.