Intel's 65nm Processors: Overclocking Preview
by Anand Lal Shimpi on October 25, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Introducing Cedar Mill and Presler
Intel's 65nm desktop processors in the first half of next year fall into two categories: Cedar Mill and Presler. Cedar Mill is nothing more than the current Pentium 4 600 series, shrunk down due to the use of the 65nm process. That means that Cedar Mill based Pentium 4s will have the same 2MB L2 cache and architectural configuration of the current Pentium 4 600 CPUs, and that they should perform no differently. The only tangible differences between Cedar Mill and today's 90nm Prescott will be a lower operating voltage and lower power consumption.
Today's Prescotts vary in their operation voltage, but the chip to which we are comparing our Cedar Mill sample has a 1.400V core voltage. The 65nm Cedar Mill sample has a 1.300V core voltage.
Intel's Presler CPU is the successor to their dual-core Smithfield processor, and does have one major architectural improvement: each core features a 2MB L2 cache, instead of the 1MB L2 cache per core on Smithfield. So, although we won't be investigating it here today, there is a performance benefit that Presler holds over Intel's current dual-core processors.
From a manufacturing standpoint, Presler is physically two separate dice on a shared package, while Smithfield was a single die that housed both cores. The difference between the two is that it is easier to achieve higher yields on two smaller dice than one large die, which is why Intel went to this arrangement with Presler.
Intel's 65nm desktop processors in the first half of next year fall into two categories: Cedar Mill and Presler. Cedar Mill is nothing more than the current Pentium 4 600 series, shrunk down due to the use of the 65nm process. That means that Cedar Mill based Pentium 4s will have the same 2MB L2 cache and architectural configuration of the current Pentium 4 600 CPUs, and that they should perform no differently. The only tangible differences between Cedar Mill and today's 90nm Prescott will be a lower operating voltage and lower power consumption.
Today's Prescotts vary in their operation voltage, but the chip to which we are comparing our Cedar Mill sample has a 1.400V core voltage. The 65nm Cedar Mill sample has a 1.300V core voltage.
Intel's Presler CPU is the successor to their dual-core Smithfield processor, and does have one major architectural improvement: each core features a 2MB L2 cache, instead of the 1MB L2 cache per core on Smithfield. So, although we won't be investigating it here today, there is a performance benefit that Presler holds over Intel's current dual-core processors.
From a manufacturing standpoint, Presler is physically two separate dice on a shared package, while Smithfield was a single die that housed both cores. The difference between the two is that it is easier to achieve higher yields on two smaller dice than one large die, which is why Intel went to this arrangement with Presler.
The chip at the bottom of the image is Presler; note the two individual processor dice.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
43 Comments
View All Comments
Viditor - Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - link
Fair enough...but certainly not with a Netburst chip. If I were AMD, I probably wouldn't release much info at this point either...
1. As this shows, there really isn't any competition until the end of 06.
2. Anouncing any concrete changes early risk creating an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect">Osbourne effect.
3. Anticipation of the new Intel architecture is too far down the track to cut into current AMD sales.
While there certainly are a few hints at some of the things to come (which AT mentions http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?...">here), there have been any number of stealth releases from AMD in the past (for example, nobody knew how much cooler the Rev E chips would end up being).
Sadly for us, we just can't predict what is going to happen at the end of next year...
How good will Conroe (et al) actually perform?
What will AMDs products actually be?
Doormat - Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - link
Yea, the chips still consume a whole lot of power, but 4.25GHz dual core is very competitive - and from some leaked roadmaps, AMD has the X2-5000 on tap for Q1'06 as well.I'm curious to know what the load temps were for those 4+GHz overclocks. And on the stock Intel HSF, right? I wonder what those crazy guys who use LN2 will get them too...
Kalessian - Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - link
Yawn, I overclocked my 1.8ghz Venice by 1gz a long time ago, and 1ghz on a K8 is much more powerful than 1ghz on a p4.You guys should have tested the lower end CPUs (2.8ghz or 3.2ghz) to test the limits. If those could push a 1500mhz+ increase I'd be impressed.
I bet I run cooler, too.
Not that progress is bad, mind you. I'm all for 65nm.