PDA

View Full Version : Reviews on P4 6xx "NDA Lifted"


bkswaney
02-20-05, 04:17 AM
http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?articleid=641&cid=1

http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q1/pentium4-600/index.x?pg=1

First 2 posted. :)
Today Feb 20 the nda is lifted.
This mean prices cut. :D

jolle
02-20-05, 05:36 AM
seems to me like intel should just give up and instead focus on the P4 M hehe..
that thing knows how to fly, the P4 is by the looks of it, dying, they cant seem to ramp the clockspeed enough, and raising the Cache doesnt seem to help all that much either..

Maybe they are holding out for the move to 64bit OS?
Isnt 64bit supposed to give a certain boost on a clock for clock basis? cause in that case Intel should se a larger boost then AMD with its higher clockfrequencies it would seem, on 64bit software that is..

nVidi0t
02-20-05, 05:43 AM
Umm, what on Earth compelled the writer of the techreport article to carry out all gaming benchmarks at 640X480 res?

jolle
02-20-05, 05:54 AM
Umm, what on Earth compelled the writer of the techreport article to carry out all gaming benchmarks at 640X480 res?

To avoid the differences to be masked by GPU performance perhaps.

|MaguS|
02-20-05, 06:18 AM
Umm, what on Earth compelled the writer of the techreport article to carry out all gaming benchmarks at 640X480 res?

Most CPU Benches are done on low settings so the game is running more on the CPU then the GPU. Low Settings usually are bottlenecked by CPU and when increasing graphics settings it starts to tax the GPU, thats why its recommended for 6800+ owners to play on decently high settings so they are working the GPU out more.

nVidi0t
02-20-05, 07:02 AM
Ah, that makes sense, but I guess you can simulate the same results if you max detail and resolution and the CPU becomes the bottleneck, considering that a 6800 GT is rarely a bottleneck in current games and performance is still largely CPU reliant.

jAkUp
02-20-05, 11:20 AM
Yes I know, they should just stick with the P4M line. Those little chips are amazing.

jolle
02-20-05, 11:36 AM
Yes I know, they should just stick with the P4M line. Those little chips are amazing.
yeah, focus on them, bring the price down (could prolly be done with largescale manufacturing if they would replace the P4).
As its more efficient clock per clock then even the A64, it should give Intel the crown back for gaming hehe.. (and push AMD harder to go somewhere with the A64, as they havent done alot with it latly as mentioned in one of the articles above)

But I guess they will stick to their plans, they got massive investments on like 10 year plans that they cant just back out of like that..
all the research on dual core P4 for example, and upcoming cores etc..

bkswaney
02-21-05, 01:56 AM
Yes I know, they should just stick with the P4M line. Those little chips are amazing.


I agree with that... The M is a badass little chip.
They should focas on IPC and get rid of all the heat.

I'm glad because this should help lower the
price on the 3.2E 478 I've been wanting. :D
I can get an EO stepping to get 4ghz.
I want 4Ghz for under 200 bucks. :angel:

nIghtorius
02-22-05, 06:28 AM
Yes I know, they should just stick with the P4M line. Those little chips are amazing.

I think you meant the P-M line.. (Banias, Dothan).. these are quite different processors compared to the P4-M line.