Processor Obfuscation and You: An Update on AMD and Intel CPUs
by Kristopher Kubicki & Jarred Walton on May 17, 2005 12:00 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Introduction
The choice of processor used to be pretty straightforward. You had AMD or Intel, sometimes with a couple overlapping options from each company. With multiple platforms from each company as well as varying features, it can be difficult to determine which CPU you really want to purchase for your system. Over the last few years, things took a turn for the worst - even without the mobility options for Athlon 64, there are four desktop Athlon 64 3200+ variants (and that's just the tip of the iceberg). We felt that it was time for an overview of all the currently shipping processor models, as well as a look at the pros and cons of each model.Before we get into the details, we want to make it clear that this is not intended to be an all-inclusive processor article. Information on many of the older processors can be found in our last CPU Cheatsheet, and this is intended partly as an update and partly as a more focused look at each model. We aren't going to go into details about every single CPU that you might find for sale right now; we're more interested in the mid-range and higher processors to be honest, as the budget chips are mostly last year's mid-range chips.
One of the key areas of interest is still something of a future release. There has been quite a bit of coverage recently about the dual core solutions from both AMD and Intel. At present, none of the dual core chips are really available (other than in OEM systems), but it's important to keep them in mind before you spend hundreds of dollars on a CPU that could be totally outdated in a few months. If you haven't already, you'll definitely want to take a closer look at our Dual Core Performance Preview.
In order to tie all of this together and bring it back to the real world, we're going to be giving our opinions on upgrade options for most of the processor platforms. This is not meant as a definitive statement of when you should upgrade and to what you should upgrade - only the individual can really determine that. Instead, it is intended as an overview of what tasks work well on various platforms and when you may find a platform inadequate for your needs. Some of you may find this information helpful, while others might simply take it as common sense. Nevertheless, we receive numerous emails every week asking for such advice, so we hope that it will prove beneficial.
For those of you who don't have the time to track every single CPU on the market - unlike some of us - we have a few tips and hints that can help you get the right processor. Not only will we look at the core names, but we will also delve into some details concerning the SKUs, or Stock Keeping Units, of several processors as well.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
55 Comments
View All Comments
flatblastard - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
"you're probably best off waiting a bit longer to upgrade from anything sporting an 865PE or 875P chipset (or else jumping ship and purchasing an AMD system)."I would like to know which one of you, Kris or Jarred, decided to throw in that last little tidbit. While I agree that it's probably best to wait on upgrading from 865pe/875p, was that last part really necessary? I was really enjoying the unbiased explanations right up until that moment. You should save comments like that for the conclusion section, where your opinions belong.
JustAnAverageGuy - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
:thumbsup;IntelUser2000 - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
Irwindale is Xeon variant of Prescott 2M, Prescott 2M is the code name for... Prescott 2M.ta2 - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
I have a Socket 754 Sempron 2800+. CPU-Z gives me this information:Codename: Palermo
Technology: 90nm
Revision: DH8-D0
This processor DOES NOT have SSE3 as stated in your article.
Rand - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
" At the time of publication, the only Paris Sempron comes in the form of the Sempron 3100+"The Paris core Sempron's are also available at 2600+ and 2800+, and available in 128KB varians not just 256K variants.
I've no idea on 3000+ varients, but I'd be surprised if there weren't some Paris 3000+ models out there.
I also didn't see any mention made of the S754 Athlon64 3300+. Granted it would appear to be available only to OEM's and that in relatively small quantities but still worth mentioning.
(2.4GHz/256K Winchester core).
Given the above you should also mention that the Winchester is available in 256K varients... at least in the one model only.
JarredWalton - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
17 - the "partial" was to indicate that not all Prescott or Celeron D chips have EM64T. I probably should have made that more clear. Basically, I didn't want to put "EM64T" and have people assume that *all* Prescotts have it. They do, of course, but it's only enabled on the +1 models.BlvdKing - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
I also have a 'CG' Clawhammer with 1mb L2 cache.ElFenix - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
thanks!pxc - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
Kristopher or Jarred: You labelled the Celeron D and P4 5xx columns "Partial EM64T". What is "partial" about it?I happen to have a P4 551 I got in December and there is nothing "partial" about EM64T support on it.
icarus4586 - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link
"Hammer chips (Sledgehammer and Clawhammer) are the oldest in the Athlon 64 fleet, and still us the "C0" stepping."There are also newer CG stepping models. (Clawhammer at least, I have one)