It's Hammer time!

[LORD-eX-Bu]

OK, you guys got me interested in the Hammer, but when will it be released? If Intel has a 3.4 ghz or 3.5 ghz by the time it is released or if it doesn't overclock good I will go back to Intel but right now you guys got me goin' on the Hammer. :eek:

[[Corporal Dan]]

Early 2003, they say.

As for OCing. Well, who knows.

But I heard it will be released at 2GHz.

If that is true, then you KNOW that it will perform equivalenly to a p4 at double the speed.

And from what I've seen, there is very low heat from the cpu. Yields are apparently good, and it should scale VERY quiclkly. Much more so than AthlonXPs

[SavagePaladin]

According to Intel, from what I HAVE heard anyway, they'll be at 3.2.
I honestly don't know how Intels is going to perform, but I do know AMDs is going to rock my world :)

[Jazz]

i heard companies r gonna be getting them in Oct and we customers will be able to get our hands on them in Jan.

Intel will probably be at 3GHz in Jan and probably will release a 3.2 soon after. I don't think they can get to 3.4 without a die shrink but im not sure, i heard they can't though. Also the PR rating of the hammer is 3400+ so at least a 3.4GHZ P4 is needed to keep up with it :)

[budd_wm]

Another thing to note about the Hammers is 64-bit instruction support. This will make for a long lasting purchase and will be one of the reasons I will be getting one. :D

BTW, is that Jazz from MURC??

[[Corporal Dan]]

Yes. 64 bit support is an important element that will grant amazing longevity.

[sebazve]

Originally posted by |TX|-LORD-EX-BU
OK, f Intel has a 3.4 ghz or 3.5 ghz by the time it is released or if it doesn't overclock good I will go back to Intel :eek:

Why if it doesnt overclock well you will not buy it?
I mean if a Hammer (not overclocked) beats any overclocked P4
I would buy it in a second.

Do you overclock for improving performance or what?

see you

[netviper13]

Yes it will, because theoretically when applications are completely 64-bit, your computer will process data twice as fast (twice as big of chunks).

In the latest issue of CPU Magazine, there was a very interesting article on 64-bit technology that compares Intel's methods with AMD's. It sounds as though AMD has an Intel beater here, as Intel's will most likely have very big 32-bit compatibility problems since it is straying from the x86 architecture.

[StealthHawk]

Originally posted by Jazz
i heard companies r gonna be getting them in Oct and we customers will be able to get our hands on them in Jan.

Intel will probably be at 3GHz in Jan and probably will release a 3.2 soon after. I don't think they can get to 3.4 without a die shrink but im not sure, i heard they can't though. Also the PR rating of the hammer is 3400+ so at least a 3.4GHZ P4 is needed to keep up with it :)

Intel will be at 3GHz before the end of this year.

[Bigus Dickus]

64 bit != 2x performance of 32 bit, not even under the most optimized circumstances.

[SavagePaladin]

I'd think it would be if you had a full 64 bit algorithm, and at any rate when in full 64 bit mode, it has twice as much data registers for the stuff.
(x86 has 8, x86-64 has 16)
So while 32 to 64 bit may not be by itself significant, along with everything else changed in the architecture, I'd say it certainly is.

(If my terms are off, I'll edit the post later...can't download the tech docs right now)

[LORD-eX-Bu]

64 bit doesn't mean twice the performance. Until applications that utilize 64 bit are released you won't see any improvement due any chip being 64 bit. A 64 bit Windows XP is due soon isn't it?

[Nutty]

Seriously tho. I thought 64bit would be slower? All the instructions take twice the amount of space. Code will double in size, more bandwidth is used just reading the instructions.

Can someone explain why just switching to 64bit mode actually makes anything faster?

ta.

[[Corporal Dan]]

Originally posted by Nutty
Seriously tho. I thought 64bit would be slower? All the instructions take twice the amount of space. Code will double in size, more bandwidth is used just reading the instructions.

Can someone explain why just switching to 64bit mode actually makes anything faster?

ta.

Not the way it works, i'll post a pic for ya

[[Corporal Dan]]

Here

Pay attention to the part i point to.

Now either i'm mistakes, or that talks about just what you've mentionned

[SavagePaladin]

Originally posted by |TX|-LORD-EX-BU
64 bit doesn't mean twice the performance. Until applications that utilize 64 bit are released you won't see any improvement due any chip being 64 bit. A 64 bit Windows XP is due soon isn't it?
I'm more concerned about the architecture being built to improve 32 bit and 64 then only that fact.
As to winXP 64, we don't even know what it'll cost :mad:

[Kruno]

I am more concerned with heat issues than speed over my current set up.

[Philibob]

I am more concerned with heat issues than speed over my current set up.
I know it's no use having the fastest CPU on the planet if it's going to die of heat in a few days.

[SavagePaladin]

Given the integrated heat spreader, I'm not concerned about that. Since I put a new hsf on my vidcard, my AthXP system isn't giving me any problems at all.