Pentium 4 Extreme Edition

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JabberJaw
macutty, in reply to some of your comments -

Quote "There is no delay in the relase of Prescott..."

See:
http://www.ocworkbench.com/ocwbcgi/n...63781566,6155,
http://www.aceshardware.com/forum?read=105038133


Quote "...and the power consumption was not reported by OEM system developers, but by Intel themselves."

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11588:

"There was another hotspot technology making the whisper rounds at IDF, it is called Prescott. Yeah, low blow, but a conversation with someone who would know told us that the numbers we hear about Prescott, 103w is on the low end of right, with 100-110w being enough to give SFF box engineers in Taiwan apoplectic fits. The power design spec of 88-103A at 1.35v is a lot of electrons flowing here and there."

(btw, I've read similar reports elsewhere. Rumors, granted, but such types of rumors have often been proven correct in the fullness of time.)


Quote "As well, this was not an issue so much as an un-expected result."

I used the word "issue" as the commonly-accepted euphemism for "problem", that is, an "unexpected result" that has a negative consequence (such as, for example, requiring a cooling fan that's louder than most customers will care to tolerate).

Anyway, it's fairly typical to run into tough problems while bringing technology products to market. None of this necessarily reflects badly on Intel, it's just part of the job.

---

OCworkbench is just plain wrong. (notice how they cited no source for this)

I worked for one of the largest OEM partners of Intel, and such we had monthly product updates and roadmap presentations. I can assure you that OEM's will start recieving shipments of prescott in the next 3 weeks for a launch date to follow shortly after (I can't specify an exact date due to NDA's that continue in force after I resigned)

A far as heat issues, all of this was posted in Intels whitepaper almost a month ago. Nothing new here.

ANd an un-expected result doesn;t have to be a negative one, or a positive one, simply an un-expected one such as this. Not a problem, and un-expected result. (only negative to a small number of people with ideas of overclocking, the rest of the "exactly to spec" world could careless.)

links:

"Prescott - Lord knows why there were so many questions about when Prescott would ship, but Intel adamantly stuck to it being a "fourth quarter revenue generator," as it is right on track with its 90 nm process." - http://www.tomshardware.com/business...df2003-01.html


"Skeptics of the move to Intel's 90nm process were put to rest as Intel showed data supporting their 90nm process having the quickest reduction in defects in Intel history"

"Intel ended the briefing by mentioning that their yields were high enough for mass production, which are fairly high given Intel's standards, although obviously the exact yields weren't disclosed." - http://anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.html?i=1869&p=2

So it seems that your OCworkbench statements are being directly contradicted by intel, and I have a tendancy to believe intel about intel processors rather than OCworkbench don't you?

The power "problem" appears to be addressed, however, older MB may not support the higher clocked Prescott processors. This should not cause a delay in Prescott's release date, nor it's scaling to 3.8GHz, or whatever, for lack of MB support.

09/17/2003 | 09:50 AM

"Intel Corporation notified its customers about design changes of Intel Desktop mainboards based on i875P, i865G and i865PE chipsets. Primarily the changes imply support for Intel Prescott CPUs coming out in late 2003 because now is just the right time to start ramping Prescott-supporting platforms.

The list of modified mainboards includes D875PBZ, D865PERL, D865GLC, D865GBF SKUs. Basically, the changes consist of CPU’s VREG enhancement for future processors support. The enhancement involves load line changes for future processors, new (G)MCH VTT support as well as support for dual load lines (needed for 4-phase power that is available on some mainboards). Additionally, Intel will provide new BIOS versions for its mainboards. About a month ago Intel already announced the same kind of product changes with some other products among the Intel Desktop Board line-up.

As a result of the modifications made to the mainboards, the new versions of Intel’s D875PBZ, D865PERL, D865GLC, D865GBF will support Prescott Socket 478 processors at speeds up to 3.60 or even 3.80GHz.

Other mainboard makers are also shipping their Prescott-ready products, but, unfortunately, do not notify end-users about changes. Do not get upset if your mainboard bought in the first half of the year will not be able to work with Prescott processors at 3.20 or 3.40GHz while the same device acquired in late August or September will function flawlessly, as there are chances that such outdated platforms will support mainstream Prescott chips at 2.80 and 3.00GHz. In case you plan to get an i865PE- or i875P-based mainboard, try to choose the one with the latest revision up to date."

"OCworkbench is just plain wrong."
Could be, I hope you're right. I'm looking forward to Prescott systems becoming available.

"I worked for one of the largest OEM partners of Intel"
If that was HP, you have my complete sympathy. As they say, if the head of the fish is dead the whole fish stinks.

"A far as heat issues, all of this was posted in Intels whitepaper almost a month ago. Nothing new here."
Small comfort for those 'apoplectic SFF box engineers in Taiwan', heh. But it's their problem, not mine. As long as the boxes work, and the fans aren't too loud.

The INQ had a good thought they just posted. Take the person that is going to buy a high priced processor in the gaming community. Since cache is relatively low heat producing, you could slap on a good heatsink and overclock the crap out of the 3.2ghz p4extreme. Which could prove a boon for the overclocking community.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JabberJaw
"OCworkbench is just plain wrong."
Could be, I hope you're right. I'm looking forward to Prescott systems becoming available.

"I worked for one of the largest OEM partners of Intel"
If that was HP, you have my complete sympathy. As they say, if the head of the fish is dead the whole fish stinks.

"A far as heat issues, all of this was posted in Intels whitepaper almost a month ago. Nothing new here."
Small comfort for those 'apoplectic SFF box engineers in Taiwan', heh. But it's their problem, not mine. As long as the boxes work, and the fans aren't too loud.

---

The SFF market is somewhat unique as there aren't any of the big OEM's building them (they tend to stick with BookPC for a smaller foot print).

So when you are a platform builder, looking to cater to a small sub-assembler market, using a non-certified standard, you can't expect the big boy's to really care if you are well looked after.

Besides, the prescott at release (3.4GHz) is a flagship procesor for high end desktops/workstations where as the SFF market is typically including features that are irrelevant or anti-productive to this market. Features like intigrated video, small foot print, after market cooling requirements, small PSU output and castrated expansion.

I think you;ll find that the thermals for the 2.4/2.6/2.8 prescotts when they are released will be completely in-line with SFF specs as that is the market they are designed to fill (if you've ever seen an internal roadmap slide they are always staggered for the market segment, i.e value/sub $600, value-mid/sub $900 etc.)

Mac thanks for all the info. Can't wait for this new chip!

Darn it! Just when I made up my mind to upgrade to the 2.4c. Now I gotta make a choice between 2.4c or 2.4 prescott. I hate it when this happens...

Quote:

---

This is a Xeon. It costs Intel nothing in R&D, and it's production cost is still well under 100$. Even if they only sell a few of them Intel stands to make a profit, so what reason could Intel have to not produce this chip?.

---

This is where you are slightly wrong. Technically it will cost them R&D and it could cost them a lot. How you say? If they release a chip that canabalizes Prescott sales they will incur a loss on Prescott and on Prescott's R&D. The flaw in this release is that Intel is essentially competing against itself, as at some point this processor will be compared to Prescott. What happens if the Extreme wins, and nobody moves to the Prescott wagon - complete loss of R&D for Intel added to the already skyrocketing costs of developing Prescott.

Sure they are banking on Prescott as being their next step, but this processor could essentially stall any major Prescott advances for up to a year. Also who really wants to buy the lame duck processor when the next best thing is coming two months later. What are businesses going to say when they realize that Intel is selling them high cache underpowered Xeons (when compared to the EE) for $3000, when the consumer gets essentially the same thing, but faster for $500. It may alienate a portion of that market, especially now that there is a less expensive, and more powerful viable competitor with Opteron. Could this push people away from Intel? I belive it is possible.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by irwincur
This is where you are slightly wrong. Technically it will cost them R&D and it could cost them a lot. How you say? If they release a chip that canabalizes Prescott sales they will incur a loss on Prescott and on Prescott's R&D. The flaw in this release is that Intel is essentially competing against itself, as at some point this processor will be compared to Prescott. What happens if the Extreme wins, and nobody moves to the Prescott wagon - complete loss of R&D for Intel added to the already skyrocketing costs of developing Prescott.

Sure they are banking on Prescott as being their next step, but this processor could essentially stall any major Prescott advances for up to a year. Also who really wants to buy the lame duck processor when the next best thing is coming two months later. What are businesses going to say when they realize that Intel is selling them high cache underpowered Xeons (when compared to the EE) for $3000, when the consumer gets essentially the same thing, but faster for $500. It may alienate a portion of that market, especially now that there is a less expensive, and more powerful viable competitor with Opteron. Could this push people away from Intel? I belive it is possible.

---

If you read carefuly you will see that Intel is planning another EE P4 based on the Prescott core so rather then this new P4 EE competing vs prescott it will end up in its own market and will become a new brand of its own such as the celeron.
As for R&D the only difference between this chip and the XeonMP is the packaging and thats it.

irwincur,

You might recall that the PIII Tualatin was released in the same time-frame as the early P4's. Although Tualatins were basically intended as server chips, at the time enthusiasts were buying them for game machines. That didn't hurt P4 sales, because most of Intel's mainstream processors are put into systems sold to businesses and "Dell dudes" anyway. (1.4 Ghz Tualatins are still selling for the same street price as a P4 2.6GHz 800MHz, around $200).

IMO today's situation is similar, except that Intel has tweaked and rebadged the server chip to tailor it to the enthusiast, and to generate some media buzz in the process.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Voodoo 5 5500
If you read carefuly you will see that Intel is planning another EE P4 based on the Prescott core so rather then this new P4 EE competing vs prescott it will end up in its own market and will become a new brand of its own such as the celeron.
As for R&D the only difference between this chip and the XeonMP is the packaging and thats it.

---

They aren't planning on another EE on the prescott core, just releasing the same core at .09u.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by irwincur
This is where you are slightly wrong. Technically it will cost them R&D and it could cost them a lot. How you say? If they release a chip that canabalizes Prescott sales they will incur a loss on Prescott and on Prescott's R&D.

---

The EE is not going to be around that long. Count on it being reelased as a 3.2 on .13u and then another speed grade or 2 on the .09u process.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by irwincur
The flaw in this release is that Intel is essentially competing against itself, as at some point this processor will be compared to Prescott. What happens if the Extreme wins, and nobody moves to the Prescott wagon - complete loss of R&D for Intel added to the already skyrocketing costs of developing Prescott.

---

You realy think intel is so dumb as to not bench the chips before they leave the plant ensuring that the prescott shows a performance gain??? [sarcasm]I mean come on, they aren't AMD you know ;)[sarcasm]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by irwincur
Sure they are banking on Prescott as being their next step, but this processor could essentially stall any major Prescott advances for up to a year.

---

Prescott is only going to be around for about a year (tejas is on schedule to be released in Q4/04) so I doubt this.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by irwincur
Also who really wants to buy the lame duck processor when the next best thing is coming two months later.

---

This is simply the world of computers, it happens everyday.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by irwincur
What are businesses going to say when they realize that Intel is selling them high cache underpowered Xeons (when compared to the EE) for $3000, when the consumer gets essentially the same thing, but faster for $500. It may alienate a portion of that market, especially now that there is a less expensive, and more powerful viable competitor with Opteron. Could this push people away from Intel? I belive it is possible.

---

One major factor of XEON's you forget: SMP

This is why people will pay for them, and with the new .09u process dont count on large chaches (or relative to what we have seen in the past) commanding a super premium. Just look at the current line of Intel procs:

Banias 1MB
Dothan 2MB
P4 EE 2.5MB
Prestonia 1MB

All of these chips are putting large chache in to the hands of those the previously could've never afforded more than 512K.

you can get a prestonia (1MB XEON for $750 right now: googlegear )

You should read this editorial:

http://www.overclockers.com/articles830/

It'll give you a little better insight in to what Intel is reallying trying to do here (and looks like the will do quite well)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by macutty

You should read this editorial:

http://www.overclockers.com/articles830/

It'll give you a little better insight in to what Intel is reallying trying to do here (and looks like the will do quite well)

---

Thats what I was trying to do in the first place! :D I'd bet dimes to dollars Intel really doesnt give a D4m* whether or not they get good profits from this new proc. All they want it to do is keep Intel at the top when Athlon64s start hitting the streets. All of AMD's precious effort to grab more market shares was very VERY effectively defeated by little to no effort by Intel. As long as these EEs perform on par with the Athlon64s Intel did what they aimed to do... Now they have more time for a nice smooth release of their next proc...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by macutty
They aren't planning on another EE on the prescott core, just releasing the same core at .09u.

---

Quote:

---

It is exactly the positioning for different market segments that lets me believe Pentium 4 Extreme Edition processor family will not have only one model working at 3.2GHz. No doubt that Intel will later introduce faster models based on the 90nm Prescott core. In fact, if you take a really close look at the Prescott core, you will see that there is enough room on it for 256bit L3 cache bus. It is definitely not for nothing, and Prescott CPUs with L3 cache should definitely become a really in the future.

---

thats off of xabitlabs.

Everything is pointing to a new brand oposite of the celeron for hardware guru's.
FYI Intel has revealed that the P4 EE will work with all current P4 motherboards and it will run at the same temp as the regular 3.2 if you factor in the larger surface area this could mean huge overclocking possibilities.
Also Prescott as not been delayed and will arrive on time as it was scheduled to 2 years for the 4th quarter of 2003.

Xbit just updated their site and Intel has revealed that the Northwood P4 EE will have better gaming performance then the prescott core at the same clocks.
Oh man If its under $1500cnd im buying one of those EE chips GD!.