PDA

View Full Version : New P4 630


Pages : [1] 2

bkswaney
02-02-05, 02:25 PM
http://www.x86-secret.com/popups/articleswindow.php?id=119

Things r not looking good for Intel and 64bit. :(

red_star
02-02-05, 03:20 PM
I guess not...

They should repack Pentium M
- 800 FSB
- dual channel DDR400
- add SSE2, SSE3 , 64bit support
- make it as dual core CPU

:)

They should ban complete P4 line...

I bet they will do that....

Daneel Olivaw
02-02-05, 04:24 PM
I guess not...

They should repack Pentium M
- 800 FSB
- dual channel DDR400
- add SSE2, SSE3 , 64bit support
- make it as dual core CPU

:)

They should ban complete P4 line...

I bet they will do that....
I second that. Or AMD gets my money when they go dual core.

edit: I just finished reading, it does overclock like crazy. I think Intel should have sold it as a 4GHz part from the start though... to save face. I'd expect no less than 4GHz with such a massively long pipeline...

The last CPUs that Intel made that were impeccable were the Dothans, the Banias, and the old Tualatin. All those have/had weak chipsets though. Imagine a Dothan on a i875!

The Prescotts and the Willamettes were lame. Northwoods were alright if you got lucky and bought a cheap one that overclocked like crazy (like me!).

r2d2d3d4d5
02-02-05, 05:23 PM
edit: I just finished reading, it does overclock like crazy. I think Intel should have sold it as a 4GHz part from the start though... to save face. I'd expect no less than 4GHz with such a massively long pipeline...

I read somewhere that it's going to take them some time to get much further than 4GHz on current tech. My guess is that they are going to stretch out the time it takes for them to get to 4GHz retail parts as long as possible.

bkswaney
02-02-05, 05:38 PM
It's sad.
I guess I might just wait till WinXP64 is released
and look at currect specs again and see what
my next big upgrade will be.

Right now it sure looks to be AMD64. :angel:

Riptide
02-02-05, 05:49 PM
Lucky for AMD they don't need 64bit Windows XP in order to be competitive right now. It would be nice... But definitely not needed. :D

Vagrant Zero
02-02-05, 06:11 PM
I want all the AMD people to repeat after me.

Schadenfreude Schadenfreude Schadenfreude.

If you don't know what that means:

Pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others.

*hugs his A64 rig*

ynnek
02-02-05, 06:19 PM
that strange since benchmarks i've read before showed that the emt64 stuff was about equal with A64.. I'll wait for more benchmarks (done in english too) from better sites to come out to make final judgement.

superklye
02-02-05, 07:04 PM
I want all the AMD people to repeat after me.

Schadenfreude Schadenfreude Schadenfreude.

If you don't know what that means:

Pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others.

*hugs his A64 rig*
Only the Germans would have a word that meant that.

bkswaney
02-02-05, 10:51 PM
that strange since benchmarks i've read before showed that the emt64 stuff was about equal with A64.. I'll wait for more benchmarks (done in english too) from better sites to come out to make final judgement.

I hope u r right.
I would like to see intel back about = to AMD in performance.
It does no one any good to have AMD this far ahead.
They need to push each other. :)

MUYA
02-02-05, 11:04 PM
There is problem with raising GHZ is that, it is limited by the placement of the traces to and from the northbridge. I cannot quite remeber it but, it is something Thunderbird once described and seemed plausible. So u will all have to ask Thunderbird.

-=DVS=-
02-02-05, 11:24 PM
Intel sucks right now they pimping dead horse :thumbdwn: how many same Pentium 4 can you release they barely faster if at all then previous cores , its time for new architecture.

Viral
02-03-05, 01:29 AM
Huh? I didn't know anyone was expecting results better than this... I guess some people are still thinking P4 has something left in it.

ynnek
02-03-05, 12:14 PM
This x86 site is biased.. They stacked the mem settings against Intel.

Noticed this after someone on another forum picked this out:


RAM settings on the Intel Platform are absolutely absurd.They say that they use 4-4-4 , but in reality if you look at the Cache BW test they use 5-5-5-12 at DDR2 533Mhz on Corsair DDR2 667 which is rated 4-4-4-12 at 667Mhz!!!!! ... Why do they cripple the Intel platform when they could have used 3-3-3-8 or at best 3-2-2-8 with that RAM????

Secondly , the use 2-2-2 on the AMD platform which are simply the best DDR can offer.Why don't they do the same treatment to Intel too when the RAM is able to do much better ??

Dr.Nick
02-04-05, 11:34 AM
This x86 site is biased.. They stacked the mem settings against Intel.

Noticed this after someone on another forum picked this out:

Because 2-2-2 DDR2 mem does not exist and none can come even close to that. ddr2 is faster but with much higher latencies; smart move on AMDs behalf to stick with regular ddr

ynnek
02-04-05, 01:05 PM
However, the ddr2 memory they used can be set to CL's of 3's, not 5's though. Hence, they stacked the mem timings against Intel, but not using best available settings.


And I'm not going to bother going into the ddr vs ddr2 argument with you. its been beaten to death.



Because 2-2-2 DDR2 mem does not exist and none can come even close to that. ddr2 is faster but with much higher latencies; smart move on AMDs behalf to stick with regular ddr

Vagrant Zero
02-04-05, 01:09 PM
Because 2-2-2 DDR2 mem does not exist and none can come even close to that. ddr2 is faster but with much higher latencies; smart move on AMDs behalf to stick with regular ddr

For now. Once DDR2-800 rolls around with decent timings I might make the switch. If AMD has DDR2 compat mobos of course.

Dr.Nick
02-04-05, 01:56 PM
However, the ddr2 memory they used can be set to CL's of 3's, not 5's though. Hence, they stacked the mem timings against Intel, but not using best available settings.

And I'm not going to bother going into the ddr vs ddr2 argument with you. its been beaten to death.

I'm not either bud but would it really have been a fair match up if they did set the timings the same? What about the speed difference? All they did was match up everyday systems imho;)

For now. Once DDR2-800 rolls around with decent timings I might make the switch. If AMD has DDR2 compat mobos of course.

I honestly dont think we'll ever see even 3-3-3 DDR2 memory. Instead we'll see DDR2 speed up to 700MHz and beyond(which is pretty much what AMD is waiting for)

coldpower27
02-04-05, 02:12 PM
There is currently memory capable of 3-2-2-4 timings at DDR2-533.
http://hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?articleid=622

If x86-Secret, can use the best DDR400 available at 2-2-2 timings, then it would be a good idea to use the best DDR2-533 available for the Intel platform the PDP PC2-4200 DDR2-533 3-2-2-4. Otherwise use the JEDEC defined standards for memory.

I suggest eithe of the two below combos.

DDR400 3-4-4-8
DDR2-533 4-4-4-12.

DDR400 2-2-2-5 or whatever is best for AMD? 2-2-2-10?
DDR2-533 3-2-2-4

ynnek
02-04-05, 03:48 PM
bingo.. thank you.

There is currently memory capable of 3-2-2-4 timings at DDR2-533.
http://hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?articleid=622

If x86-Secret, can use the best DDR400 available at 2-2-2 timings, then it would be a good idea to use the best DDR2-533 available for the Intel platform the PDP PC2-4200 DDR2-533 3-2-2-4. Otherwise use the JEDEC defined standards for memory.

circuitbreaker8
02-04-05, 04:01 PM
Intel sucks

bkswaney
02-04-05, 05:19 PM
Intel sucks


Not really. They have been the leader for so long
it was time for a change.

You can bet they will be back.
Intel needed changes made.
Well, now that is happening. I look to see
intel have some badass stuff in about 24 months or so.
Look for it. ;)

AMD is the leader in gaming pc's.
Well, as far as speed goes anyway.
Other than that I do not see a big deal.
Any CPU AMD or Intel 3Ghz and up is more
than most need anyway. :rolleyes:

Jocomp10
02-04-05, 05:50 PM
\Other than that I do not see a big deal.
Any CPU AMD or Intel 3Ghz and up is more
than most need anyway. :rolleyes:

Yeah, but if you don't have the fastest processor available your not cool... right. :)

bkswaney
02-04-05, 10:03 PM
Yeah, but if you don't have the fastest processor available your not cool... right. :)


Really? I guess I'm not cool. :p

Pantherman
02-05-05, 12:19 AM
Only geeks have the fastest CPU available.