The Consequence of Waking Up a Sleeping Giant: Intel Roadmaps Inside
by Kristopher Kubicki on January 25, 2005 7:44 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Single Core Desktop
Now for desktop processing; we have good news and better news. The good news is almost all desktop Prescotts (including the Celerons) will get a 64-bit makeover real soon. Unfortunately, you'll still need to buy a new processor but the roadmaps indicate there will be virtually no price premium on the 64-bit versions. With Windows XP 64-bit release less than a few months away, it makes sense that Intel's 64-bit push comes strong and hard in the 9th inning. We are particularly interested in how fully committed the roadmap details EM64T; even the puny Celerons get the instructions. You may recall that the Socket 754 Sempron processors are nearly identical to AMD's Athlon 64 processors with half the cache and the 64-bit instructions removed. It will be interesting to see how the two companies play this against each other as AMD will be the 32-bit SKU on the desktop when WinXP Pro x64 launches.
Just to detail the whole outline for 64-bit Socket 775 processors, here is a quick roadmap of what we have to look forward to:
| Intel Single Core Mid Range Desktop Lineup LGA775 | ||||
| Processor | Speed | L2 Cache | FSB | Launch |
| Pentium 4 XE 3.73GHz | 3.73GHz | 2MB | 1066MHz | Soon |
| Pentium 4 XE 3.46GHz | 3.43GHz | 512KB | 1066MHz | Nov 2004 |
| Pentium 4 571 | 3.80GHz | 1MB | 800MHz | Q2'05 |
| Pentium 4 561 | 3.60GHz | 1MB | 800MHz | Q2'05 |
| Pentium 4 551 | 3.40GHz | 1MB | 800MHz | Q2'05 |
| Pentium 4 541 | 3.20GHz | 1MB | 800MHz | Q2'05 |
| Pentium 4 531 | 3.00GHz | 1MB | 800MHz | Q2'05 |
| Pentium 4 521 | 2.80GHz | 1MB | 800MHz | Q2'05 |
| Celeron D 355 | 3.33GHz | 256KB | 533MHz | Q4'05 |
| Celeron D 351 | 3.20GHz | 256KB | 533MHz | Q2'05 |
| Celeron D 346 | 3.06GHz | 256KB | 533MHz | Q2'05 |
| Celeron D 341 | 2.93GHz | 256KB | 533MHz | Q2'05 |
| Celeron D 336 | 2.80GHz | 256KB | 533MHz | Q2'05 |
| Celeron D 331 | 2.66GHz | 256KB | 533MHz | Q2'05 |
| Celeron D 326 | 2.53GHz | 256KB | 533MHz | Q2'05 |
As you can see, the EM64T enabled CPUs have incremented their model numbers by 1 relative to their non-EM64T counterparts. We're glad that Intel is making a clear distinction between the two variants, rather than simply adding a new suffix. Where there is no earlier part, like the 3.33GHz Celeron D, the model numbers do not have the +1.
The 3.73GHz Pentium 4 EE will show up real soon, if that's your thing, and it will become the second processor to support 1066FSB. We haven't been real impressed with the 1066FSB launch thus far, and a 300MHz bump in clock speed doesn't strike us as something that will revolutionize the performance desktop anytime soon either. However, keep in mind this new P4EE is very different from the previous 3.46GHz revision, and with a different core we may see a very different performance curve on the 1066MHz front side bus. The rest of the Intel roadmap neglects to mention any other 1066FSB processors, including the dual core behemoths, so the technology is either a little bit ahead of its time or simply a temporary dead end.
Next we have the great news. Not only will we see the launch of four Prescott 2M/Iriwindale processors next month, but soon after we will also get our first taste of Smithfield - several quarters ahead of what the previous roadmap had anticipated! Prescott 2M will launch with four SKUs listed below, along with a "670" model clocked at 3.8GHz sometime shortly after.
| Intel Single Core Performance Desktop Lineup LGA775 | ||||
| Processor | Speed | L2 Cache | FSB | Launch | Pentium 4 670 | 3.80GHz | 2MB | 800MHz | Q2'05 |
| Pentium 4 660 | 3.60GHz | 2MB | 800MHz | Q1'05 |
| Pentium 4 650 | 3.40GHz | 2MB | 800MHz | Q1'05 |
| Pentium 4 640 | 3.20GHz | 2MB | 800MHz | Q1'05 |
Like the other Prescott processors, Prescott 2M will launch with EM64T and XD, but it adds Enhanced Speed Step (EIST) as well. EIST is very similar to AMD's Cool n' Quiet as it dynamically ramps the clock speed of the processor to conserve thermals and power. However, the big difference between CnQ and EIST is maturity - EIST has existed in some form or another since the earliest days of the P6 architecture. How EIST will affect performance on everyday desktop processing - particularly on a processor with such a high clock speed - we leave for the actual launch date sometime next month.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
74 Comments
View All Comments
jiulemoigt - Friday, January 28, 2005 - link
#42 the problem with Rambus was the company tried to make the entire industry pay them for DDR2 because of tech they suggested to the Industry standards comision without telling them they patented it already when the Standards comminty was tring to find open standards. That and it is like P4 a long pipe when forced to branch wastes clock cycles{way to often}.Zebo - Friday, January 28, 2005 - link
Unless they get 2-2-2 DDR2 out AMD is wasting it's time (and performance) with DDR2. Negitivty twards Intel? Probably because they keep pimping that marketing gimmick called netburst. And heaters called prescott, but worse this time with two. EVERY, I mean every CPU in history has worked twards more effecientcy. Not intel.You can read about it all here.
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/pentium...
That article includes the excellent Dothan too, which they should have done in the first place instead of raising our power bills and room temps.
JarredWalton - Thursday, January 27, 2005 - link
#34 and #35 - Why all the negativity towards Intel? I certainly don't think this is all the greatest thing ever, but it's a welcome change from the last 3 months of Intel roadmaps where chips were canceled and release dates were postponed. AMD is still way back in terms of revenue, and that isn't going to change over night. I hope they continue to make improvements in their design, but anyone that thinks Intel is just sitting still is loco, plain and simple.As for the technologies you "poo-poo" above, DDR2 is an industry standard. AMD is avoiding it initially because they don't really need it yet, so when they do need it they can just join the club. That's fine, but at the same time it's good to have one company pushing things forward. AMD pushed 64-bit and forced Intel to join them, and Intel is pushing DDR2 and FB-DIMM technologies, which will benefit everyone in the long run.
In retrospect, do you REALLY think Rambus memory was that bad? It wasn't necessary on the Pentium 3, and it was more expensive than DDR at the time, but economies of scale come into play. If the public had not had a huge backlash against RDRAM, it would probably still outperform equivalent DDR on Intel platforms. The only real problem with RDRAM was that it was a closed standard, so you had to pay royalties.
If you look at the big picture, none of these companies are really out there trying to make the world a better place just for altruistic purposes. They all want to make money. If AMD gets bigger, it will be because they're making more money, and generally speaking that means that they'll be acting more like Intel. To #39, I would say that it *IS* a competition, and we want it to stay that way. If it just becomes another ho hum update each year, we'll end up just like the car industry.
danidentity - Thursday, January 27, 2005 - link
One more question, is there any confirmation to the rumors that the 6xx series of P4's will have downward unlocked multipliers because of EIST?Anemone - Thursday, January 27, 2005 - link
From what I"ve seen a 600 series @ 3.6-3.8ghz should keep up with the FX55 in a lot more games than you'd think. That's based partly on results of EE's clocked @ 3.7-3.8... Of course we will see soon, but of course AMD might easily find another 200 speed bump somewhere too.If you all remember the performance bump from the 845 to the 875, I think you might want to give some thought as to just what "could" be provided by the 955.
I'm also rather sad the 925XE 'may' not accept the dual core. Oh well. If they'd get rid of that idiotic oc lock, I'd spring for the 955. Would be nice to get back to 875 days or better imo.
I'm mostly glad the two are so tightly in competition. I bet that doesn't make Intel happy but it is sure doing nice things for customers. Again, with the exception of the OC lock which was a stupid mistake...
Quanticles - Thursday, January 27, 2005 - link
#8, AMD partners with IBM for their fabricationAll of this is the same old inefficient core slapped together with a little bit more cache, a faster FSB, blah blah blah. Their dual-core setup with have an amazing 10% performance increase I'm sure, maybe that extra cache will make up the last 5%. Now if only this stuff wasnt being released a year from now, cause I'm sure AMD will have better than this in the next 6 months - they just keep their cards to themselves.
Anandtech - tnx for hyping this for Intel. Every page had even "better" news, although I'm not sure who the news was better for. You make it sound almost like a competition.
KristopherKubicki - Thursday, January 27, 2005 - link
Peter: Surely you jest. The predecessor to PowerNow! technology showed up in spring 2000. The first real production processor with PowerNow was the mobile Athlon4 line in May 2001 - which had 5 frequency stages and 6 core voltage stages.Not to split hairs or anything, but the first P3 to show up with speedstep was the 600MHz variant which showed up 3 months before K6-2+ in Jan 2000. In Q2'01 SpeedStep improved and which allowed dynamic clocking, but also allowed voltage adjustment with deepsleep.
Concerning latency: EIST today requires a 30microsecond delay to transition frequency, 100microseconds for voltage. Last I checked the AMD driver for CNQ had a 0.03 second hard delay on frequency/voltage adjustment.
OK fine - things are even up until 2003. Then something called Pentium M showed up in Q1 with EIST. EIST goes beyond changing the clock speed and voltage and will actually switch processor logic on and off when it isnt needed. On the Yonah processor EIST will actually disable portions of the cache it isnt using.
CNQ just isn't doing this yet, but Intel already has 2 years of experience doing that with Banias/Dothan. If we want to talk about innovation, what has AMD been doing for the last 2 years with PowerNow other than renaming it to Cool N Quiet for the K8?
Kristopher
KristopherKubicki - Thursday, January 27, 2005 - link
Live: there are two launches - one of the 6xx line, another a little bit later for 945/955. I dont know if the dual core launch falls at the same time as the 945/955 launch but there will be more data available then at least.Kristopher
Live - Thursday, January 27, 2005 - link
O I whish we could edit our comments. CeBIT is of course in February not March. My whole guessing game kind of falls a part if it would be in March.“So launch in February it is, which coincides with CeBIT Hanover 10-16 February.”
miketheidiot - Thursday, January 27, 2005 - link
First of all I see nothing on here that will allow intel to take back the performance crown. Of course I already see that intel probably will win the dual core publicity/prestige/etc, even though I think their design will probably be garbage.#8, amd has had 90nm out for 3 months and it has worked much better than intel's 90 IMHO. Second they are well into the construction of another fab, so I highly doubt they will go fabless any time soon. On top of that intel was, and still is, getting its ass handed to it by AMD 130nm
#34 there was some news about AMD unfortunately going to ddr2 in '06. This will require a new socket, so if there is to be a Hypertranport2, which I do remember hearing, it probably accompany that change.
I do hope that Intels accelerated dualcore will get AMD to start moving a bit quicker. They demoed dual core quite a while ago, I would suspect that it could go into production very soon if they really needed it to.