PDA

View Full Version : 2mb L3 Cache P4 to be released



Lohsing
19-09-2003, 07:12 PM
Extreme Edition P4 (http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,112513,00.asp) to be released shortly.

"The CPU will include a 2MB Level 3 cache, which should help boost its performance in demanding applications such as graphics-heavy games. Today's Pentium 4 processors include a 512KB L2 cache, but no L3 cache (in fact, none of Intel's desktop processors include an L3 cache). At launch the processor will run at 3.2 GHz, the same speed as Intel's current top-end Pentium 4."

Now that's something to envy... ;)

Lo.

Mike
19-09-2003, 08:13 PM
Interesting to see the note about the Prescott at the end of that article. I received an email day-before-yesterday telling about the launch of Prescott early next year.

There's also been a hint that the price of 2.6G and above P4s will drop on October 26

Mike.

tweak\'e
19-09-2003, 09:00 PM
sounds like what AMD did to the k6-2 to make the k6-3.

the question is..how much better will the cpu be?

metla
19-09-2003, 09:27 PM
My question would be..

How expensive will it be?
And...why would i need one?

My rig is a xp2200,512mb ddr,g4ti4200,...damn thing flies,oodles of grunt,takes every game and/or task i throw at it in its stride,and i cant see myself upgrading any of it in the next 2 years(well,i might drop a xp3200 in her in a years time)....

kiki
19-09-2003, 11:53 PM
If you read up on the new Xeon chips at Tom's hardware, the extra 1mb of L3 cache in the Xeon chip provides only very minimal performance for the extra $1000 you would pay for it. So in that light, I doubt that 2Mb of cache will do much for the P4. Good for show n tell though ;)

DangerousDave
20-09-2003, 01:00 AM
they're just jealous of AMD's 64 bit processor coming out very soon (hopefully)... remember, mhz is cheap, cache is expensive...

- David

Mike
20-09-2003, 02:30 PM
> they're just jealous of AMD's 64 bit processor coming
> out very soon (hopefully)...

Why hopefully? You going to buy one?

Mike.

kiki
20-09-2003, 03:15 PM
2 Xeon's way outperform 2 Opterons.

agent
20-09-2003, 04:35 PM
Yes, but Intel needs to learn that if they lower their prices to match those of AMD, they'd sell far more processors.

segfault
20-09-2003, 04:51 PM
> 2 Xeon's way outperform 2 Opterons.

Do you have any benchmarks I could look at? Also, it's worth noting that the Xeon is a 32bit processor while the Opteron is a 32/64bit processor (iirc, anyway). :)

kiki
20-09-2003, 05:42 PM
Xeon and Opteron benchmarks (http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030811/index.html)

The dual Xeon's do a bit better in the applications etc which is where you want them to do well. Also with 2 processors you have the advantage of dedicating one processor to your game, and the other for doing system work etc.

Mike
20-09-2003, 05:55 PM
> Xeon and Opteron benchmarks (http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030811/index.h
> ml)
>
> The dual Xeon's do a bit better in the applications
> etc which is where you want them to do well. Also
> with 2 processors you have the advantage of
> dedicating one processor to your game, and the other
> for doing system work etc.

From what I read in that article, the Xeon doesn't "way outperform" the opterons... AMD's dual Opteron is breathing down its neck - as the benchmarks bear out impressively! (The last line of that article) :)

Mike.

kiki
20-09-2003, 08:47 PM
Ah a bit exagerated, I read it a week ago and all I could remember was 'I want dual Xeon machine!!' :)