raceware

Xbit Labs claims 120W Prescotts and ...

Recommended Posts

According to a news story on Xbit Labs website with supporting info. at many others, Intel's latest published road maps are about a year premature. Evidently there are major problems at Intel with 90 nano designs and the Prescott is likely to be relased with a power disappation of 120W = a FLAME THROWER by anyone's account. Water cooling may be mandatory with Prescott??? That would be an expensive nightmare for everyone concerned.

According to Xbit Labs, Tejas which is the next gen after Prescott is now pushed back to '05 at the earliest, based on existing design/development issues with Prescott. So much for the claims that 90 nano was ahead of schedule and working well at Intel labs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will design proper heatsinks for them. Probably, with mutliple fans. Watercooling is an expensive option. I have yet found a reason to get more than Dual Athlon 2100+ MPs. I found nothing that does not run fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be a major mistake for Intel to NOT correct the thermal problems with their 90 nano process. The problems can be corrected but at a price and time penalty. You'd think they'd have learned from their past but maybe in a rush-to-market mentality - probably learned from MS... they'll ship it now and fix what they can after consumers discover all the problems.

What an unethical way to conduct Biz IMNHO. Highly prifitable as MS has demonstrated, but very unethical!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
..with a power disappation of 120W = a FLAME THROWER by anyone's account...

Jesus! :o

That's a lot of heat! Frankly, too much to be true...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would be a major mistake for Intel to NOT correct the thermal problems with their 90 nano process. The problems can be corrected but at a price and time penalty. You'd think they'd have learned from their past but maybe in a rush-to-market mentality - probably learned from MS... they'll ship it now and fix what they can after consumers discover all the problems.

What an unethical way to conduct Biz IMNHO. Highly prifitable as MS has demonstrated, but very unethical!

The have to rush now, Athlon 64 is far better cpu than they projected... Now its Intel's turn to play a little catchup to maintain market strategies...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 120W figure is axccurate as Intel has to add more cache to try and gain a little performance because they are so far behind A64. Despite the added cache Prescott won't be competitive. Too little, too late. Intel really is in a rare situation often referred to as between the rock and a hard place. This is the second major blunder by Intel in the past few years. They grossly underestimated Athlon's performance and AMD's ability to execute. This resulted in P4 being rushed to market and all the associated problems. Seems like Intel is a slow learner??? I'd expect some heads to roll by the end of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. We'll see what happens on the low-end then, as Prescott-based Celerons emerge and good stuff like that. I just got a new Intel roadmap this past week, actually...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The 120W figure is axccurate as Intel has to add more cache to try and gain a little performance because they are so far behind A64. Despite the added cache Prescott won't be competitive. Too little, too late. Intel really is in a rare situation often referred to as between the rock and a hard place. This is the second major blunder by Intel in the past few years. They grossly underestimated Athlon's performance and AMD's ability to execute. This resulted in P4 being rushed to market and all the associated problems. Seems like Intel is a slow learner??? I'd expect some heads to roll by the end of the year.

More AMD fanboy drivel...... Intel has a long history of sorting out the problems and ending up with a good product, and they'll do that again.

AMD better start making a profit or they are gone - A64 was their grasp at keeping alive and it's only selling well into the enthusiasts channel -- which isn't high quantities....

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMD isnt able to produce them (in quantity) they're only planning to make 100 000 chips this year!! The Athlon 64 wont really hit big until next year...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
..with a power disappation of 120W = a FLAME THROWER by anyone's account...

Jesus! :o

That's a lot of heat! Frankly, too much to be true...

That's nothing compared to the power that Itanic 1 requires :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I can see the Intel fanboys have shown up and this thread will go to Hell just like on every other forum...

You don't need to believe anything I post. Check other sources for confirming information. If you read the Xbits Lab story or any others on Prescott/90 nano in recent months you would already know that Prescott was scheduled for release in Q2 '03, then on 9-26-03 as the A64 killer, then Q3 '03, then Q4 '03, and now it's officially been pushed back until at least Q1 '04. Check the latest Intel road map this week for some clues.

It's also worth noting that Intel has had to add cache to their entire line of Xeon, P4, Prescott and planned Tejas in a kneejerk reaction to A64. If Intel has "everything under control" why are they having fire sales on their entire processsor line? Why is Intel paying even larger financial incentives to everyone they can get to NOT sell or display AMD products like at Computex and to Dell, CompUSA, Best Buy and others???

As Xbits and any other websites will confirm, die size increases with increased cache, power consumption increases with larger cache, and heat disappation increases too. If you don't understand the technical aspect of CPU design, why would you even argue? Wouldn't it make more sense to educate yourself on the subject instead of advising how Intel will sort thru the problems in no time with their magic stick??? If they could have solved the problems then Prescott would have been released by now. Intel wouldn't need to have a paper launch of EE which is an engineering sample no one can buy... These are Hail Mary responses by Intel because they have no competitive products. Even the die hard Intel bias websites have admitted this reality.

If you don't know, you might ask someone who does know and they will confirm Intel has been applying bandaids to the P4 since it was rushed to market to compensate for Athlon's superior performance four years. While Intel was applying bandaids to the P4, AMD was developing a complete new generation of processors. Intel has not even started a 9th gen in ernest. This stuff is all documented so there ain't no need to argue, just do your homework.

Every few years when AMD develops a new processor line they have red ink which is quite normal when you read the 10Q financial reports and see the investment they make in R & D. At the end of the development process when the product is released to market then the R & D costs are recovered along with increased profits. Athlon allowed AMD great success and Opteron has really made an impressive go in the enterprise arena. A64 is a clear winner in the desktop/laptop and workstation segments. Intel's response is fire sales, much lower ASPs, $600 million x 2 for IRS bills plus litigation costs, huge price incentives and no competitive products. Intel has never been the X86 underdog before and they are in serious trouble.

AMD is the company people like to write off as going out of Biz. And they are so good at it they've been doing it for 30 years! Yeah, for those of you who are late to the party, AMD some 30 years ago actually produced Intel's CPU's for them when they needed more fab capacity. Now that Athlon has been a success and big industry players like IBM, Sun, HP, Cray Supercomputers and a bunch more are onboard, you can bet AMD is going to be around for a long time. And if you don't realize it, that is good for every consumer because without competition you'd be paying $900 for a Pentium 90 chippie and that would be the fastest speed available.

But hey, don't believe me, check the record for yourselves. This info. is all available online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this whole AMD vs Intel "Battle of the Fans" scenario just too friggin hilarious. People act as if they have vested interest in these companies (maybe few do, but you get me drift). Many of you would rather buy an inferior product for the stupid reason of being a "follower" (a.k.a, fan, a.k.a fanatic, a.k.a stupid) of the other corporation. I can understand being passionate about sports teams, & the colorful players they're composed of. But being a fanboy of some anonymous overseas company churning out pcb boards or silicon chips is for the nerds.

Get a girl friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMD is like the French Vs. Germany in WWII. Pulling at grasping at straws to compete with an industry that is much more resourceful, has a lot more money, and a good record.

AMD has actually left a bad taste with their older stuff. How come I am able to run a 1.6ghz Intel processor in an Intel-based motherboard that was made in 1998, but with AMD, the motherboards that came out 2000 are actually less stable than my old 1998 one.

AMD cannot survive on pitty because AMD has no pitty. They are a business. And them teaming up with IBM doesen't make me like them any better. The old

k6-poo platofrms were a joke, the early Athlon's motherboards were jokes, and their new rating system is a joke.

They were supposed to deliver something truely revolutionary, but all they came up with was something that nobody needs, while Intel is increasing cache on chips, finding new methods of increasing performance (Hyperthreading), providing extremely stable and glitch-free chipsets....

I don't see how AMD can win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AMD is like the French Vs. Germany in WWII. Pulling at grasping at straws to compete with an industry that is much more resourceful, has a lot more money, and a good record.

Ok that was a terrible analogy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i have to admit Intel made a mistake rushing the Pentium 4 since AMD released the Athlon T-Bird and it was crushing their Pentium 3 line of processors, i think Intel is missing something, because they are not making new cores at all, and they don't work on their future chips ahead of time so i'm thinking they are missing designers in order to do this. Also i don't know if this is true, but aren't some of the AMD designers from Intel? anyways Intel has a lot of money and all they need is a better routine to use it.

But being a fanboy of some anonymous overseas company churning out pcb boards or silicon chips is for the nerds.

What about the designers? My plans are to become one of them and i'm not a geek :o but they make me laugh...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technological superiority doesn't mean a thing if you can't actually sell your product. Whatever you may think of Intel's products, you can't deny that they know how to sell. Intel is expensive compared to other brands (and not only their CPU's) but their core business hasn't been seriously threatened by anyone for a very long time. On the one hand their hardware is very good. i820 was a fiasco and the early P4 underperformed compared to PIII and Athlon but Intel can fairmy easily survive short periods until it catches up again. On the other hand everyone uses Intel CPU's and has done so for years. They know Intel products best. They also know Intel itself best. One reason why AMD isn't as successful as it could be is their horrible service. One of our dealers (a really big one with a name like a submachinegun) doesn't do AMD chips because AMD is totally inflexible. When they have to RMA a CPU it often takes months to get a replacement. Before AMD can be truly succesful it has to clean up it's act and improve service and marketing.

As to watercooling - I read somewhere that watercooling inside a chip is being researched. Very small channels wit fluid would take the heat from inside the CPU to the outside, providing better cooling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As to watercooling - I read somewhere that watercooling inside a chip is being researched. Very small channels wit fluid would take the heat from inside the CPU to the outside, providing better cooling.

I had a similar idea to this some time ago, but the core (like the P3 cores) having direct contact to the heatsink is still one of the best ways to control the temperature on the chip but it seems like the future cores will be using top metal layers and making internal temperature conducting pipes should be the best for that type of design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AMD cannot survive on pitty because AMD has no pitty.  They are a business.  And them teaming up with IBM doesen't make me like them any better.  The old

k6-poo platofrms were a joke, the early Athlon's motherboards were jokes, and their new rating system is a joke.

They were supposed to deliver something truely revolutionary, but all they came up with was something that nobody needs, while Intel is increasing cache on chips, finding new methods of increasing performance (Hyperthreading), providing extremely stable and glitch-free chipsets....

1) can you tell me why is xp rating joke ? i think that e.g. xp2400+ is comparable to pIV 2.4GHz...so where is the joke ??? :blink:

2) Have you ever seen any benchmark with pIV with HT enabled and with HT disabled ? in normal use of course...no syntethic benchmarks :rolleyes:

Results with HT disabled were better then with HT enabled B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From all calculations AMD should have the fastest processor for at least 6 months. The Athlon FX 53 should be out before a 3.4 GHz prescott is available for purchase. There is no doubt that a 2.4Ghz Athlon FX 53 will be signifigantly faster than a 3.4 Ghz Prescott (20% or more in most benchmarks). I believe this will change the minds of some people and may help AMD with their financial situation as their market share inclreses although I just unloaded all of my AMD stock because it tripled its price this year and I had a huge profit to claim. I am waiting for Intel's stock to plummet (take a $5 to $10 hit)next year after a few bad quarters in a row so that I can buy a thousand or more shares of Intel stock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no doubt that a 2.4Ghz Athlon FX 53 will be signifigantly faster than a 3.4 Ghz Prescott (20% or more in most benchmarks).

Perhaps its wise to wait for actual benchmarks before throwing around numbers like this? The dutch version of the proverb goes "don't sell the hide before you've shot the bear", I'm sure you have something similar.

As for me: I'm not going to buy a new motherboard until PCI-Express is available (I might await BTX form factor as well), so I'll decide on a CPU then, not now. All this speculation at this time seems a bit pointless to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those paying attention FX53 benches have been available for weeks... and yes they are significantly higher than P4 EE and way more than Prescott engineering samples which are actually slower than EE. Numerous websites have FX51 benches and FX51 O/C benches. Start at Ace's Hardware for accurate data then you won't need to argue or speculate. AMD can ship FX53 any time it deems it useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now