Intel Pentium 5
Wednesday, February 26, 2003 by kona0197 | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
has anyone heard about this new (code named Pentium 5) Intel Chip? Word on the street is the memory for your system (SDRAM, DDR, ECT.) is built in to the chip so no upgrading. Anyone heard anything?
 |
|
Page 1 of 4 | |
|
|---|
kona0197
Reply #2 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 9:56 PM
Reply #2 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 9:56 PM
Not impossible. I have a inside source. Decides, if you buy this chip with 2 gigs of DDR 3600 RAM on the chip, what more do you need? Also heard that Microso*t is developing a special OS just for this chip.
_5480
Reply #3 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:00 PM
Reply #3 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:00 PM
An inside source, eh? The last I heard, the Pentium5 was code-named Prescott, but what do I know? 
kona0197
Reply #5 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:02 PM
Reply #5 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:02 PM
well I think it is but alot of my friends just call it the pentium 5 for lack of a better name until they actually name it. I don't think it will be a Pentium though.
kona0197
Reply #6 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:04 PM
Reply #6 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:04 PM
I hate Intel anyway. I run AMD. The Athlon beats the P4 up and down in benchmarks. I just wanted to hear everyones thoughts on a new chip.
vizo
Reply #7 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:06 PM
Reply #7 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:06 PM
heres the info on 'Prescott' at least according to zdnet
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-985156.html
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-985156.html
kthxbye
Reply #8 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:10 PM
Reply #8 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:10 PM
Well, if you're talking about Prescott - it's looking like it'll be a nice little chip. 1 MB L2 cache, 800Mhz bus, enhanced hyperthreading ability to possibly scale to 4-5Ghz.
It's still just a standard x86 processor that uses existing OSes and all that though.
Still, Intel's gotten back into the position of making AMD play one heck of a job of catch up.
It's still just a standard x86 processor that uses existing OSes and all that though.
Still, Intel's gotten back into the position of making AMD play one heck of a job of catch up.
kona0197
Reply #9 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:11 PM
Reply #9 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:11 PM
INTEL still sucks in benchmark compared to a AMD or even a G4
kthxbye
Reply #10 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:16 PM
Reply #10 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:16 PM
Erm... coming to this as an AMD user, and fan, I have to say: "Fraid not."
http://www17.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030217/cpu_charts-21.html#benchmarks_under_windows_xp
http://www17.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030217/cpu_charts-21.html#benchmarks_under_windows_xp
kona0197
Reply #11 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:20 PM
Reply #11 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:20 PM
I AM A AMD USER AND A FAN! I have a duron machine and I am getting a athlon XP w/barton core 3000+ processor as soon as my taxes come back
_5480
Reply #12 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:24 PM
Reply #12 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:24 PM
FYI, Intel's P4 3.06Ghz chip beats AMD Athalon XP 2800+ in almost every single benchmark category out there. However, I'm sure most of you have heard about the Athalon64, this is gonna topple Intel, kinda how ATI beat nVidia with their new Radeon 9700. It's a 64-bit chip with backwards-compatability with 32-bit code. Intel will not be able to beat AMD if they release the P5 as a 32-bit chip. Computing has evolved...
paxx
Reply #13 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:27 PM
Reply #13 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:27 PM
kona, are you talking about Intel's LaGrande (TCPA) and Microsoft's Palladium? (now renamed NGSCB: Next-Generation Secure Computing Base)
If yes, then it's completely different.
Read Anderson's controversial article, although some say he is misinformed : http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
And this article that I found a little more objective: http://wintermute.homelinux.org/miscelanea/TCPA%20Security.txt
Of just search "LaGrande TCPA Palladium" on Google.
If yes, then it's completely different.
Read Anderson's controversial article, although some say he is misinformed : http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
And this article that I found a little more objective: http://wintermute.homelinux.org/miscelanea/TCPA%20Security.txt
Of just search "LaGrande TCPA Palladium" on Google.
kthxbye
Reply #14 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:28 PM
Reply #14 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:28 PM
"It's a 64-bit chip with backwards-compatability with 32-bit code"
Which honestly, to 90%+ of the computer users out there is not going to make the least lick of difference, really.
64 bit computing is /not/ some great speed increase over 32 bit computing for every day use. The big draw of it is the increased amount of accessable memory - which is one of the reasons you're seeing Intel's IA-64 marketed only in the server arena.
Which honestly, to 90%+ of the computer users out there is not going to make the least lick of difference, really.
64 bit computing is /not/ some great speed increase over 32 bit computing for every day use. The big draw of it is the increased amount of accessable memory - which is one of the reasons you're seeing Intel's IA-64 marketed only in the server arena.
kona0197
Reply #15 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:30 PM
Reply #15 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:30 PM
Maybe I have been misinformed and I am talking out my a**. Anyways, thanks for the info.
Angel_Wings
Reply #16 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:32 PM
Reply #16 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:32 PM
Uhmmmmmmmmm
"Code named Pentium 5"????????? LMAO!
Hmm. Pentium 1, 2, 3 and 4...and if a 5 follows (more than likely)... Angel_Wings doesn't that being named Pentium 5 will be much of a surprise and hardly a 'code name' [he-he].
"Code named Pentium 5"????????? LMAO!
Hmm. Pentium 1, 2, 3 and 4...and if a 5 follows (more than likely)... Angel_Wings doesn't that being named Pentium 5 will be much of a surprise and hardly a 'code name' [he-he].
Angel_Wings
Reply #17 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:33 PM
Correctomundo...
Angel_Wings doesn't think that being named Pentium 5 will be much of a surprise and hardly a 'code name'
Reply #17 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:33 PM
Correctomundo...
Angel_Wings doesn't think that being named Pentium 5 will be much of a surprise and hardly a 'code name'
paxx
Reply #18 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:35 PM
Reply #18 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:35 PM
About processor speed: Unless one does some heavy 3D rendering or play the latest 3D games, processor speed today don't matter much anymore anyway.
Once you passed 1.4, 1.8 Gigs or so, more than that is hardly noticeable. Word won't open faster, your emails won't get sent faster, Photoshop won't open or save images faster neither.
You know. When it takes 2 seconds to accomplish a task, do you really notice it if your faster processor now takes 1.5 seconds instead?
Once you passed 1.4, 1.8 Gigs or so, more than that is hardly noticeable. Word won't open faster, your emails won't get sent faster, Photoshop won't open or save images faster neither.
You know. When it takes 2 seconds to accomplish a task, do you really notice it if your faster processor now takes 1.5 seconds instead?
kthxbye
Reply #19 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:38 PM
Reply #19 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:38 PM
Yes - the law of Diminishing Returns is very much alive and well in the world of computers. 
kona0197
Reply #20 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:49 PM
Reply #20 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 10:49 PM
Sorry... not code named pentium 5 just called that for lack of a better name.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 1 of 4 | |
|
|---|
Reply #1 Wednesday, February 26, 2003 9:54 PM
It's just rumours. Too many people have different needs.
It's like saying that all new houses will be built with the same number of bedrooms...