Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: Pentium 4 Extreme Edition




  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    As reported earlier, the initial Prescott-core Pentium 4s will now be launching in the first quarter of next year (news), at 3.40GHz. As that quarter extends we should also see the Prescott hit 3.2, 3.0, and 2.80GHz flavors. Then during the second, third, and fourth quarters the Prescott P4 looks to be available at 3.6, 3.8, and possibly 4.0GHz, respectively.

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    1,661

    Default

    Intel to ship Pentium 4 Extreme Edition processor next week

    Sources close to Intel reported the company’s plans to ship the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition processors next week. Systems powered by the new Pentium 4 chip with 2MB L3 cache and 3.20GHz core-clock are expected to emerge also next week.

    Unveiled during IDF Fall 2003 in San Jose, the new Pentium 4 Extreme Edition CPU is based on the server core known under Gallatin code-name. The processor, however, only boasts with additional cache, but does not support SMP. The new Pentium 4 Extreme Edition is fully compatible with existing Socket 478 infrastructure and 800MHz Quad Pumped Bus. With 512KB of L2 cache and 2MB of L3 cache, Intel wants to offer an alternative to AMD’s high-end Athlon 64 processors with 1MB of L2 cache that has been available for about a month time now.

    If the reports from various sources are correct, the chip could retail at around $1000, even higher than we originally suggested.

    xbit

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    These things are already doing 27k+ in 3DMark and 17k on PCMark memory bench.

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    476

    Default

    are the supporting motherboards, availability, price............

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JSR
    are the supporting motherboards, availability, price............
    All boards support it. Price is around $925.

    Which isn't bad considering if you went with an FX51 setup you will spend even more than that. So this time around, Intel is still cheaper.

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    476

    Default

    what's the comparison against the 64/3200?.........for you, if your boards supports it, then you're only looking @ the cpu.............which is worth considering........and, i wouldn't want the fx for it being a single channel, ram specific solution.......pretty pricey, considering the dual channel component is just around the corner...........but the 64/3200 gets you into the 64 bit arena for cheap...............and gaming is my thing, so, what's the better deal?

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    FX51 is already dual channel.

    The comparison is pretty close. It seems the FX51 is pretty evenly matched against the 3.2EE, although Intel still has the top ORB score @ 28.5k and rising. AMD is at 28k.

    FX5900 - 3DMark2001 [20,566] - 3DMark2003 [7,281] - Aquamark3 [56,694]
    Ti4400 - 3DMark2001 [16,028]

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    476

    Default

    the 940 was only single channel, and the 939, which comes out first quarter 2004 was the dual channel varient, with the exception of needing buffered memory, which is a plus.............anyways, i'd like to see how it stacks up against the 64/3200+. which @ 450 seems pretty affordable

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JSR
    the 940 was only single channel, and the 939, which comes out first quarter 2004 was the dual channel varient, with the exception of needing buffered memory, which is a plus.............anyways, i'd like to see how it stacks up against the 64/3200+. which @ 450 seems pretty affordable
    All Opterons (Sledgehammer) have dual channel memory controllers which the current AthlonFX is based on (minus one pin). Athlon64's (Clawhammer) have only a single memory controller. Early next year the AthlonFX will receive a new core supportin' unbuffered memory and it'll likely loose the 2 extra hypertransport buses that it can't use (not bein' SMP enabled) but this new core even though still likely to have 939pins will require new mobo's to support it.
    The P4EE even though based on the XEON core still uses the P4's 478 pinout and not the XEON's 603 pinout but atm only i865 and i875 based mobo's will support it.

    Athlon 64 FX and Athlon 64 vs. the P4 EE
    Another review
    One more review

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    476

    Default

    the EE is a viable option...............but, this is a xeon mp basically...........and from what i've read, the 64's scale away from the EE even though the 64's are handicapped somewhat by lack of support

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •