Intel Dual Core Performance Preview Part I: First Encounter
by Anand Lal Shimpi on April 4, 2005 2:44 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
The Chip: Pentium Extreme Edition
As we mentioned in our IDF coverage, Intel has dropped the number 4 from their naming for their dual core parts. The new dual core desktop CPUs will simply be called the Pentium D and the Pentium Extreme Edition.
Both the Pentium D and Pentium Extreme Edition are nothing more than two 90nm Prescott 1M dies glued together. That means that each core has its own 1MB L2 cache, and that also means that architecturally, these chips are no different than the single core Pentium 4s that are out today - other than the obvious dual core fact.
Contrary to what we've reported earlier, the only difference between the Pentium D and the Pentium Extreme Edition is the presence of Hyper Threading; mainly, the Pentium D doesn't have it, while the Extreme Edition does. Both chips will only use a 800MHz FSB, they both have the same cache sizes, and they only differ in the presence of HT.
Armed with Hyper Threading, the Pentium Extreme Edition allows the execution of 4 concurrent threads and appears as a quad processor CPU to the OS. Without Hyper Threading, the Pentium D only allows for 2 concurrent threads and appears as a dual processor CPU to the OS.
While the Pentium D will be offered in three speed grades, from 2.8GHz up to 3.2GHz, the Extreme Edition will only be launched at 3.2GHz. Note that the fastest single core Pentium 4s run between 3.6GHz and 3.8GHz, so there is a significant clock speed penalty paid by going to dual core.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
141 Comments
View All Comments
michaelpatrick33 - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
AMD's dualcore will use less power and produce less heat apparently and last I checked an FX-51 (2200) out performs the Intel 3200 in a single core configuration so it will be interesting what a dualcore AMD at 2200 or 2400 will do compared to the Pentium 4 3200 dualcore. AMD is going after the busines market where the money and the desire for dual core will be greatest. Why isn't Intel going for that market? Interesting question.CrazyCurl - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
good review! cant wait to see more info. I am particularly interested in heat dissapation as well and would be nice to see the new unreal engine that supports multithreading benchmarks but that would be be a ways off id assume.Is the 955X gonna support pressler? is that why it has 1066 fsb and ddr-667?
dragonflycms - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
How about a web developer test I constantly run these programsDragonflycms 9.1.2
Apache 1.3.9
MySql 4.1
PHP 4.0
Photoshop 7.0
Flash MX 2004
Fireworks MX 2004
Dreamweaver MX 2004
Firefox
Hydra IRC
Messenger
Yahoo Messenger
The web server and mysql drastically effect the runing of the multimedia applications. This would be a great multitask test.
cHodAXUK - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
#34 You are absolutly right there Anand, to this day I have still not had a single CPU system as responsive as my old dual O/C Celeron 550 machine. I ran it along side a P3/800 for a long time and always much prefered the Celeron box for general day to day tasks, hell my AMD 3500 feels damn fast most of the time but when I try multitask a bit too much it just takes forever to even get menus to pop down. Dual core is definately the way to go for the future, when the apps/games start to catch up with the technology everyone will wonder how they ever did without a multi core/cpu system.stephenbrooks - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
If it's any help to y'all asking about thermals, [H]ard|OCP says:"Our Intel 840 will have an operating voltage between 1.2V and 1.4V and have a Thermal Power Design of 130W"
knitecrow - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
thanks Anand... it is the power consumption and power dissipation profiles that I really want to see.Anand Lal Shimpi - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
oh and power consumption is coming... :)Anand Lal Shimpi - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
Hans MaulwurfThese usage scenarios were described by AnandTech readers in my recent request for benchmarks, they weren't anything prescribed by any hardware manufacturers.
Ask anyone who has used a dual processor system, things are just smoother. The reason we've never recommended dual processors systems in the past is mostly because of price. In less than 3 months you should be able to, in theory, purchase a dual core processor for as little as $240. Not since the days of the dual Celeron 300A systems has dual processing been that affordable.
Take care,
Anand
Slaimus - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
The best thing about dual core is that you do not need HT aware OS's anymore. It sucks when you want to run Win2000 with HT and getting slower speeds.Shlong - Monday, April 4, 2005 - link
Instead of trying to take screenshots, maybe you could've used one of those desktop video capture programs to try to get a better visual representation of what you were trying to explain.