Intel's 925X & LGA-775: Are Prescott 3.6 and PCI Express Graphics any Faster?
by Anand Lal Shimpi on June 21, 2004 12:05 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Intel's Pentium 4 560 - The Model Numbers Continue...
Intel's LGA-775 Prescotts are architecturally the same as their Socket-478 Prescotts, so we'll direct you back to our Prescott article for more information on exactly what it means to be a Prescott. The only differences you'll find between LGA-775 Prescotts and their Socket-478 counterparts are that you can get a 3.6GHz LGA-775 CPU, whereas the fastest Socket-478 chip is still 3.4GHz, and all LGA-775 CPUs use Intel's new model numbering scheme.As we've reported before, Intel's model numbering system basically uses arbitrary numbers to represent various CPUs. The numbers don't necessarily mean higher clock speeds; they just denote faster CPUs within a family.
All of the Prescott based Pentium 4s fall into the 5xx series:
- Intel Pentium 4 560 (3.6GHz)
- Intel Pentium 4 550 (3.4GHz)
- Intel Pentium 4 540 (3.2GHz)
- Intel Pentium 4 530 (3.0GHz)
- Intel Pentium 4 520 (2.8GHz)
Intel has been understandably quiet about their new model numbering scheme. After all, they were the ones who were so openly critical of AMD's model numbering system upon its release. Intel forced AMD down the road of model numbers, and it looks like they have actually painted themselves into a corner with requiring the use of model numbers as well.
AMD has made some mistakes with their model numbers in the past, and it will be interesting to see how Intel handles some of the same challenges that AMD has faced. For starters, by completely disconnecting the model numbers from clock speeds, Intel has avoided the issue of applying conservative or liberal ratings to processors. At the same time, you have to give credit where credit is due, and we must say that Intel's modeling system is strangely reminiscent of AMD's numbering systems.
First 64-bit x86 extensions and now model numbers, Intel has been enjoying the taste of shoe for a while now, it seems.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
39 Comments
View All Comments
khirareq - Friday, April 1, 2005 - link
Um, sorry, but i feel that i need to point something outYou state a number of times that the pins need to be twisted in order to secure the HSF - If you read the leaflet thats included with the CPU, it staes that the Pins are twisted in order to relase the HSF for removal
Intels Manual DOwnload (>10meg):
http://support.intel.com/support/processors/sb/CS-...
Screenshot of the page:
http://photobucket.com/albums/v337/khirareq/?actio...
I discovered this at work the other night after spending some time trying to work out how to remove one, and resigned to reading the manual (turn out the HSF was faulty and jammed in the board anyways)
Pete - Tuesday, June 29, 2004 - link
Anand, not to get too confrontational, but have I offended you in such a way that you choose not to reply to my questions? I'm not sure why my surprise at the 6800U's gains in Far Cry aren't worth remarking on.I'd appreciate an answer. If you take exception to my questioning your numbers, I'd be satisfied with a reply to that effect, and I'd readily apologize if I've offended you with my perhaps overly blunt questioning.
justly - Sunday, June 27, 2004 - link
Anand, thank you for the response, and for the effort you put forth in getting it.A few (minor) questions could still be asked about mechanical stability, but it is much more believable than the electrical issue.
Again, thank you.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Friday, June 25, 2004 - link
justlyAs promised, I got together with Intel to talk about their statement. Intel has revised their statement and instead state that the ~40 lbs of pressure is used for mechanical stability and not for the stability of the electrical connections - good call :)
As you already mentioned, LGA-775 is a different story since it needs the pressure to keep the contact with the pins. Apparently the heatsink doesn't need to apply as much pressure as before since the mechanical stability isn't an issue with LGA-775.
So in the end it wasn't a heat transfer issue or an electrical issue, purely mechanical.
I've made the appropriate corrections to the piece.
Take care,
Anand
Pete - Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - link
Hi Anand,Any comment re: my previous post on the 6800U Far Cry numbers? Just checking if they're right. Thanks.
Cygni - Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - link
Ive actually discussed Prescott a little with a designer at Intel's Folsom facility (although this person worked on the Granite Bay chipset and then some Centrino work). He cant really figure out the chip either, but he believes that the entire purpose of Prescott hasnt been taken out from under wraps yet. Possibly mechanisims to combat the problems with increases in clock speed etc... things that are on the core, just not activated (ala HT). I guess we will see. Maybe the purpose of Prescott is to ready technologies and proccesses to combat Hammer's successor when it appears? Neither of us were sure.stephenbrooks - Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - link
Those software compilation scores do not look pretty for Intel. Looks like they'll be approaching 5GHz before a Prescott-like processor will beat even an FX-53! 8-\ New CPU core, please...araczynski - Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - link
very nice article, like the depth.sounds like the bottom line (for my tastes) is to get the 6800U and forget the intel line for another year.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - link
ThePlagiarmasterSorry, I completely forgot to post my reply to your post :)
We started using Gordion Knot because that's what we found was most recommended for high quality DivX ripping. Instead of just benchmarking every codec/ripping tool for our CPU reviews, what I'd rather do is compare all of the codecs/tools and figure out which one truly offers the best quality - then it's the performance using that configuration that matters. After all, who cares if AMD or Intel is faster if it's on an application that no one actually uses; that's not the point of a real world benchmark.
Give us time, and we will not disappoint. I've already talked to Derek about doing such an article, but now I think I'm going to push up its priority a bit.
Take care,
Anand
ThePlagiarmaster - Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - link
Anand.I take it no comment means you're off benchmarking dvd2avi for a divx showdown?? :)
Pumpkinierre,
You're welcome :) Hopefully we'll get some benchmarks here, proving once and for all who's rules the divx roost. At least Anand's users would be more informed in the end. For anyone interested LOOK HERE:
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjMwLDU=
Looks like a 20% victory for AMD64 in Divx (dvd2avi). A quick look lower on the page shows Intel(3.6ghz 3.4EE) with about the same 20% victory in Divx(Xmpeg frontend). Perhaps Anand can end it all by testing one against the other?
Maybe a whole article could be done on this? With say, Ripping to Divx, Ripping R9 Retail to DVD5 (CCE/Tmpeg etc?), Ripping MP3's etc. I'm sure there are more CPU intesive ideas, but the point is finding the best app to do the same job on both platforms. Rather than a blanket statement like 'intel is better than amd at divx' when it's not clear that's true. Not with so many frontends to choose from that do the same job, and CLEARLY they perform DRASTICALLY different on each cpu (amd/intel). With games it's cut and dried (no frontends, just the game itself), but apps are a different story.
Plag