A Blast from the Past: The Pentium 4 660 and the Pentium Extreme Edition 955

Two weeks ago I asked everyone what older CPUs they’d like to see included in one of our quietly introduced features on AnandTech: Bench.  I got requests for everything from original Pentium processors to VIA’s Nano.  While I’m working on adding additional data to the tool I just finished testing two older CPUs over the weekend that I thought would be useful in this review: the Pentium 4 660 and the Pentium Extreme Edition 955.


Pentium Extreme Edition 955 (left) and Pentium 4 660 (right)

Both of these CPUs are from 2005.  The Pentium 4 660 was a single-core processor based on Intel’s infamous Prescott core.  The processor had a 2MB L2 cache and Hyper Threading support; it ran at 3.6GHz, a higher clock speed than any current AMD or Intel processor.

The Pentium EE 955 is based on two separate Intel 65nm Presler cores on one package (ah, remember the early days of dual-core?).  The 955 ran at 3.46GHz but had HT enabled, allowing it to execute 4 threads at the same time.


Pentium Extreme Edition 955 (left) and Pentium 4 660 (right)

When the Pentium 660 debuted it cost $605, while the Pentium EE 955 would set you back $999 in 2005.  These were some of the fastest Pentium 4s ever released and you’ll see them compared to a couple of ~$90 CPUs here today.

The Test

Motherboard: Intel DX58SO (Intel X58)
Intel DX48BT2 (Intel X48)
MSI DKA790GX Platinum (AMD 790GX)
Gigabyte GA-MA790GP-DS4H (AMD 790GX)
Gigabyte GA-MA790FX-UD5P (AMD 790FX)
Chipset: Intel X48
Intel X58
AMD 790GX
AMD 790FX
Chipset Drivers: Intel 9.1.1.1012 (Intel)
AMD Catalyst 8.12
Hard Disk: Intel X25-M SSD (80GB)
Memory: G.Skill DDR2-800 2 x 2GB (4-4-4-12)
G.Skill DDR2-1066 2 x 2GB (5-5-5-15)
Qimonda DDR3-1066 4 x 1GB (7-7-7-20)
Corsair DDR3-1333 4 x 1GB (7-7-7-20)
Video Card: eVGA GeForce GTX 280
Video Drivers: NVIDIA ForceWare 180.43 (Vista64)
NVIDIA ForceWare 178.24 (Vista32)
Desktop Resolution: 1920 x 1200
OS: Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit (for SYSMark)
Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit
Intel’s Response: The Pentium E6300 SYSMark 2007 Performance
Comments Locked

55 Comments

View All Comments

  • vajm1234 - Tuesday, June 2, 2009 - link

    its really hard to believe ad a lil concern for upcoming c2d processors --- why that 6300 sample didnt overclock? wat was wrong 3.7 i xpct normally but i m amazed as its a 45nm.... not 90 or 65
  • crimson117 - Tuesday, June 2, 2009 - link

    I'm getting image not found for this first image on the last page of the review:

    http://www.anandtech.com/reviews/cpu/amd/athlon2/l...">http://www.anandtech.com/reviews/cpu/amd/athlon2/l...
  • ShawnD1 - Tuesday, June 2, 2009 - link

    I like how you included the overclockability at stock voltage. Since all of my computers use stock heatsinks, overclocking at stock voltage is pretty much all I can do.
  • Gary Key - Tuesday, June 2, 2009 - link

    I used the standard heatsink off the Phenom II 940 on the X2 250, 1.4V, and hit 3.825GHz in Win7 64, idle temps around 33C, full load at 54C. I have retail CPUs coming with the new cost reduced heatsink to see what happens but any stock AM2+ heatsink from a Phenom/PhenomII works wonderfully for overclocking these two CPUs.
  • RamarC - Tuesday, June 2, 2009 - link

    I know AMD has 'nudged' mobo makers to prevent this, but some still allow it. I'm curious why Anand didn't experiment with it.
  • AnnonymousCoward - Wednesday, June 3, 2009 - link

    I figured those extra cores have defects.
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, June 2, 2009 - link

    It's more of a timing issue than anything else. I spent a lot of last week working on Lynnfield and there's one more CPU review before this week is up. I am curious about it and will look into it shortly though :)

    Take care,
    Anand
  • flipmode - Tuesday, June 2, 2009 - link

    Hi Anand. Great review, it is much appreciated. The first thing I looked for was a comparison to the Brisbane CPU. To me, a comparison to Brisbane and a comparison to Penryn are the two most interesting.

    Just thoughts.
  • ltcommanderdata - Tuesday, June 2, 2009 - link

    I'm guessing if Phenom II X2s use harvested cores, they'll eventually be a limited commodity. Still, the Athlon II X2 seems to have a lot of scaling room left so higher clocked Athlon II X2s will probably do just as well.

    I just flipped through the benchmarks this morning, but since I was one of those commenting on wanting to see the best of dual core Netburst processors like the 965EE for comparison, I wanted to thank you for deciding to include the 955EE.
  • ltcommanderdata - Tuesday, June 2, 2009 - link

    As a follow-up is AMD still making 90nm dual cores or have they converted the fab to 45nm now? I believe the previous fastest dual core was still the 3.2GHz 90nm Athlon 64 X2 6400+. It's too bad it wasn't included here.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now