PDA

View Full Version : Intel admitted Pentium M is Pentium III


AthlonXP1800
01-01-06, 09:53 AM
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_02/b3966010.htm

Wow that surprised me, I thought Pentium M is a completed new and different core from Pentium III so very few people know what Pentium M is stand for, "M" is called Modification based on heavy modified Pentium III core.

Intel also admitted here are design faults in Yonah core because the new dual core chip still carried old Pentium M technogoies into the core. I am sure Intel now realised that they need to depart Pentium M designs that no longer incorporated in future design like Merom core.

I guess life will never the same without Pentium M.

jolle
01-01-06, 09:59 AM
old news, perhaps not that they admit it, but still..
The irony of it has been highly amusing, and still is, how the P4 after all these years is getting its ass handed to it by its prequel, and is looking to be replaced by it..
The P4 did seem like a tradeoff right from the start, not as good, but easier to sell, IE slower but higher clockrates, and thats what sells with the regular Joe out there..

The M stands for Mobile I think, that was prolly a pun or somesuch by the reporter..

Knot3D
01-01-06, 12:07 PM
Yeah, pretty much old news. Unofficially i thought most ppl knew.

Anyway, i think Xbitlabs had a huge 3 part feature about the P4.
Marketing did indeed play a (too) large part in the design process
of the Netburst architecture.

Although things were pretty ok up to Northwood.

uOpt
01-01-06, 12:41 PM
Nobody who ever programmed, optimized and profiled under the various CPUs ever had any doubt that the P3 and the PM are the same thing.

$n][pErMan
01-01-06, 03:03 PM
I liked my P3 5 years ago when i had one .... lol.

Toss3
01-01-06, 07:19 PM
[pErMan']I liked my P3 5 years ago when i had one .... lol.
That just shows us what a great design the Pentium 3 has/had! I mean it doesn't require much power and it runs games very well, almost as good as the athlon 64 FX's! It just lacks some of the new cpu technology...
http://www.pugetsystems.com/max_pc.php

john19055
01-02-06, 09:58 PM
That is old news to me ,I always thought the P3 was a better design then the P4,I always used the P3 because it was pretty equal to the amd chip and when they switch to the P4 I switch to the AMD chip because it was faster even at lower clocks .To me the PM chip is just as good as the AMD chip,faster in some applications.

Toss3
01-03-06, 06:55 AM
That is old news to me ,I always thought the P3 was a better design then the P4,I always used the P3 because it was pretty equal to the amd chip and when they switch to the P4 I switch to the AMD chip because it was faster even at lower clocks .To me the PM chip is just as good as the AMD chip,faster in some applications.
Yup, this is why Intel should continue to develop the pentium3's instead of the P4's! They're just upping the clockspeeds and who wants to pay like 1000$ for a P4 @ 4Ghz that runs games slower than an Amd 64 X2 4200+ ?
I don't get it why they just don't notice that the Pentium 3 is an even better design than the athlon 64! It runs games better at the same clocks than the Athlon 64's and they don't even have all of the new stuff! Think about a Pentium M dual core both cores clocked at 2,8Ghz! That would be nice and amd would get owned in games, applications would be another matter though... (xmastong)

a12ctic
01-03-06, 10:31 AM
Intel will never be able to beat the amd 64s there the best x86 compadable chips out there and theres not even a question about it... They have the most efficient aratecture around, the ppc's dont even beat them, the only proc that i can say is beter than the amd64s/optys has to be SPARCULTRA and its not x86 compatible so no good.....

nutball
01-03-06, 10:51 AM
Intel will never be able to beat the amd 64s there the best x86 compadable chips out there and theres not even a question about it...

Would you like a wager on that?

he only proc that i can say is beter than the amd64s/optys has to be SPARCULTRA

:smoking2: OK, I think I've read enough to understand where you're coming from.

Now, on-topic, I'm not sure I understand why there's all the controversy about all of this, except maybe that people are getting hung up on semantics. Pentium-M and Penitum 4 Mobile are *completely* different cores, always have been, and everybody has always known that they were. Is that the problem?

As for what the future Intel cores are based on (Merom, Conroe, Yonah, all that jazz), well there are copious threads over at Aces and RWT on the subject... are they based on P-III or are they ground-up new cores? Well the answer (unsurprisingly) depends on what you mean by "based on" and "ground up re-design". Funny that! Seems to me that people are getting all hot under the collar about misinterpretation of each others semantics.

Superfly
01-03-06, 10:59 AM
Intel will never be able to beat the amd 64s there the best x86 compadable chips out there and theres not even a question about it... They have the most efficient aratecture around, the ppc's dont even beat them, the only proc that i can say is beter than the amd64s/optys has to be SPARCULTRA and its not x86 compatible so no good.....

congratulations - this is already the dumbest post of 2006 and we have'nt got to the end of January yet!!!

(cheers)

911medic
01-03-06, 12:30 PM
Thank God the P-M is based off the PIII and not P4! Just look at the power hungry P4-M's.
And yes, this is not exactly breaking news that the P-M is PIII-based. Whatever it's drawbacks, the P-M has reigned supreme in the mobile world, pretty much since its introduction. Only recently, with the Turion, has AMD offerred some competition that comes close in power consumption and performance. And even it doesn't dominate the P-M.
Here's a good article if anyone's interested: http://www.laptoplogic.com/resources/detail.php?id=17
It breaks down some of the history of both the P-M and the Turion before comparing the two. And, on page 2, it discusses the P-M's PIII roots.

Toss3
01-03-06, 01:00 PM
Heh I feel a bit dumb for not reading the tomshardware story about the upcoming Intel processors. http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/04/top_secret_intel_processor_plans_uncovered/page8.html
It could be my English skills or something else(maybe the cold I've got), but I didn't really understand whether the the new processors will be based on the Pentium M design or nott?
The introduction of the Merom design will be a turning point in Intel's product policy, because it will be the backbone for all processor families that go into the desktop, the mobile or the enterprise space. In contrast, the desktop and enterprise markets are provided with Pentium 4 and Pentium D NetBurst architecture processors while the mobility CPUs are derived from the more efficient Pentium M design.

So if all of the new processors are based on the merom design and the yonah 1 and 2 are based on the pentium M, then wouldn't this mean that they have all had to come from the pentium3? :retard:

and although asking about this might make me seem like a retard, please keep in mind that I have a cold and my head is filled with snot... (xmastong)

Treason
01-04-06, 02:39 AM
Anyone know what the P3 Coppermine's and Tualatin's were equivalent to compared to the P4 Williamette's? i.e 1.13 GHz vs. 1.4 GHz?