Pentium 4s Get Faster Memory :)

[CaptainRAVE]

Although Intel hasn't officially released the news, it is confirmed that PC makers will be able to purchase a new chipset that will allow the Pentium 4 processor to work with fast DDR-SDRAM memory after December 17th.

 

DDR-SDRAM will allow PC makers to offer computers around the same price as those equipped with regular SDRAM, but perform nearly as fast as those with RDRAM, which at one time was the only choice for Pentium 4 users because of its faster speed.

 

Customers have already flocked to buy chipsets with the cheaper SDRAM, and it's expected the DDR-SDRAM will be even more popular. This will bring Intel in line with AMD, which already offers DDR-SDRAM chipsets for their fastest processors.

[Nob Akimoto]

Faster? No.

 

More efficient? Yes.

 

DDR-SDRAM compared to PC800 is significantly more bandwidth efficient.(Due to better latency.)

 

The i845D chipset however is the LOWEST performer among current P4 DDR boards, ranking behind the P4X266 from VIA, and the SiS 645.

[GUNNER]

holy cow Nob, your really up on your hardware huh.

 

I'll know where to come when I have some more questions.

[TornSoul]

The major reason why Intel is doing this is because it's cheaper. They need to get prices down to compete with AMD.

[CaptainRAVE]

Yea, slowly slowly though they are starting to catch up with AMD ....I much prefer Athlons though

[TornSoul]

On mobile processors they are still miles behind AMD though:

 

But sources say the new Pentium 4 will also be much more power hungry than current Pentium III-M processors, which go up to 1.2GHz, or current Athlon 4 mobile chips from Advanced Micro Devices.

 

As a result, notebook makers will need to take extra precautions to fit the Pentium 4 into existing lines. Models that don't have a second fan for heat removal, for example, will likely have to add one. Larger, heavier batteries will also be part of the mix.

 

Some industry watchers have jokingly referred to the mobile Pentium 4 as the George Foreman Lean, Mean Grilling Machine.

[CaptainRAVE]

Yea, AMD seem to concentrate more on their mobile processors. I prefer AMD anyway, even though Pentiums have the clock speeds, Athlons can handle many more instruction sets per ms.....I currently have an Athlon in my system. Im also interested in the new processor they are making which doesnt need a heat sink as it loses the heat itself because its made of a different metal

[Argath]

"Instruction set" refers to the set of instructions a processor uses, like mov, je, fdiv, fmul, etc. for x86 and x87. x86 is an instruction set. pop is an instruction (or a mnemonic for the opcode 0x05, to be completely accurate) that's part of the x86 instruction set. The terms aren't interchangeable.

 

A processor can be rated for speed based on how many instructions per clock (or, I suppose, per millisecond, though that's not a rating I've ever seen used since it only encompasses a single clock speed of a certain processor) it can execute, but "instruction sets per clock" doesn't make sense. It's like saying, "My car gets 20 MPH per gallon."; the terms just don't agree.

 

Anyway, just a heads-up for you. I assumed you'd rather someone point out your mistake than let you continue making it.

[CaptainRAVE]

Go here to the AMD site and compare some of the processors. Just look to the right and choose which processor type you would like to compare. You might think because this is AMDs site then it might be biased. This would not be allowed by law, so it is indeed accurate.

[Argath]

I don't understand your point, if that post was made in reply to mine. Could you elaborate?

[Agen]

I currently have an Athlon in my system. Im also interested in the new processor they are making which doesnt need a heat sink as it loses the heat itself because its made of a different metal

Yeh that sounds good, i'm also quite interested.By seeing how it goes i might buy one.

[StephenG]

i've got one of those Athlon XPs for xmas from my uncle early but i need a new motherboard to use it.

[CaptainRAVE]

Originally posted by Argath

I don't understand your point, if that post was made in reply to mine. Could you elaborate?

 

I just did it for the general interest of the site as it is quite interesting to compare the processors. It was to get at your point or anything though.

[Argath]

Ah, okay. I wasn't sure if you misunderstood what I was saying or what. Thanks for the clarification.

 

The benchmark section of AMD's site has quite a few links, as well, although it's still a good idea to get reviews from independent hardware review sites, since they're more likely to show benchmarks that demonstrate the strengths and weaknesses of a processor. AMD's seem to do it to an extent, although I haven't really spent a lot of time looking at them.

[CaptainRAVE]

Yea its much better to read the independant reviews as the AMD site might be just a *little* biased . I havent looked through the site properly for a while, I havent needed to and I havent had the time . I did before I bought my processor though to see which was best quality/cost.......in the end I just got the best processor out at the time to save all the bother even though I didnt bother with the P4s as they were clearly much worse in the comparrisons and in the reviews.

[Nob Akimoto]

AMD's white papers are about as trust worthy as Intel's when it comes to performance comparasions.

 

Especially when you check the new Morgan scores compared with Celerons.

 

Not only do they provide the Morgan with DDR-SDRAM(not something you'd yet find in a "budget" box), but they also give it a GeForce2MX over the Celeron's i815 integrated i752 graphics core(a pathetic piece of silicon.)

 

By the way, the effect the Organic Pin Grid Array packaging has on the AthlonXP's thermal properties is minimal.

 

While it DOES exhibit better heat dissipation over the older ceramic packaging, OPGA is still not enough considering the Athlon's thermal density, and the fact that AMD's very new to this game, and lack the expertise that Intel's gained over the last 3 years.

 

PS: On Mobile Processors.

 

AMD's sitll got a long ways to go to fill the gap Intel's created in this arena.

 

While they have a planned M1800(1.53Ghz Athlon4 Mobile Processor), this isn't due till sometime next year, a period till which Intel holds dominance in the mobile market, simply because of their much better Tualtin core Pentium III(For all intents and purposes Intel would be better off using this core for mobile purposes period, rather than trying to come up with a P4 derivitive.)

[CaptainRAVE]

I wouldnt believe them properly either...but its nice to get a general idea of performance.

[thrEEpaGe]

this isn't exactly news.....p4x266 boards have been around for quite some time, and there are even some p4x333 boards.....not a big deal.....and yes, ddr ownz rdram

[CaptainRAVE]

Intel was and still is the undisputed leader as far as market share in PC processors is concerned. AMD has however, managed slowly but steadily to gnaw at that lead. A recent report by Gartner Dataquest indicates that Intel's lead has been greatly reduced in Q3. That reduction has even resulted in AMD possessing 50% of the market in some countries, such as Japan.

 

So in Japan 54% of home PC's had AMD processors, a significant rise from the 24% AMD had during Q3, 2000. In Western Europe 49% of home PC's had AMD processors during Q3, 2001 while the equivalent figure for the same period in 2000 was 25%.

In the US AMD sales overall reached 27% in Q3, 2001 up from last years 17% for the same 2000 time period. Broken down the figures for AMD in the US were:

40% of commercially sold PC's had AMD processors while 33% of government and 18% of education PC's had an AMD processor running the show.

These results will certainly help raise spirits within AMD since they are eagerly anticipating the same figures for Q4, 2001. Those figures will really count for them since they will include the new XP line, remember they are trying to convince the market that MHZ don't count, and the effects of the recent P4 price cuts announced by Intel.