Intel's Pentium 4 E: Prescott Arrives with Luggage
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on February 1, 2004 3:06 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
The Pentium 4 has come a long way since its introduction in the Fall of 2000. It went from being a laughable performer, to a CPU embraced by the community. Today Intel is extending the Pentium 4 family with the third major revision of the chip – codenamed Prescott.
Back when Prescott was nothing more than a curious block on Intel’s roadmap, we assumed that history would repeat itself: Intel would move to a smaller, 90nm process, double the cache and increase clock speeds. Intel has always historically behaved this way, they did so with the Pentium III and its iterations, and they did so with the first revisions of the Pentium 4. What we got with Prescott was much more than we bargained for.
Intel did move to a 90nm process, but at the same time didn’t produce a vastly cooler chip. Intel did double the cache, but also increased access latencies – a side effect we did not have with Northwood. Intel also moved to Prescott in order to increase clock speeds, however none of those speeds are available at launch (we’re still no faster than Northwood at 3.2GHz) and Intel did so at the expense of lengthening the pipeline; the Prescott’s basic Integer pipeline is now 31 stages long, up from the already lengthy 20 stages of Northwood. With Prescott, many more changes were made under the hood, including new instructions, some technology borrowed from the Pentium M and a number of algorithmic changes that affect how the CPU works internally.
If you thought that Prescott was just going to be smaller, faster, better – well, you were wrong. But at the same time, if you view it as longer, slower, worse – you’re not exactly on target either. Intel has deposited a nice mixed bag of technology on our doorsteps today, and it’s going to take a lot to figure out which side is up.
Let’s get to it.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
104 Comments
View All Comments
INTC - Monday, February 2, 2004 - link
Ummmm yea, kinda reminds me of cooking an egg on an Athlon XP http://www.biggaybear.co.uk/Menu/Aegg/Aeggs.htmlcliffa3 - Monday, February 2, 2004 - link
something good to include on the mb compatibility article would be what boards would house the 2.8/533...i'm wondering myself if the E7205 chipset would...i have a p4g8x, and it would be a welcome upgrade with HT and all the other goodies if it oc's well.Stlr22 - Monday, February 2, 2004 - link
They didn't burn down, but the proc were running hot. Not to mention, these are the FIRST releases in the Prescott line. What's it gonna be like later on?....Just think, a P4 based computer that turns your living room into your very own Sauna!!....WHOOO-HOOO!!.....now that's what I call a bargain!
INTC - Monday, February 2, 2004 - link
The message is clear: Anandtech and all of the other review sites didn't burn down so I guess it's not a flame thrower.Prescott is not as fast as I had hoped but is definitely not the step backwards as some were rumoring it to be. I think a Prescott 2.8 @ 250 MHz FSB will be really nice to play with until I see what Intel announces at IDF in a few weeks.
Icewind - Monday, February 2, 2004 - link
The message is clear: Im buying an Athlon 64.Vanners - Sunday, February 1, 2004 - link
Did anyone catch the error in Pipelining: 101?if you halve the time for a stage in the pipeline and double the number of stages. Yes this means you can run at 2GHz instead of 1GHz but the reality is you're still taking 5ns to complete the pipe.
Look at it like a motorbike: You drop down a gear and rev harder; you make more noise but you are still doing the same speed.
The only reasons to drop down a gear are to break through your gears (i.e. slow down) or to rev significantly higher than the change in gear ratio in order to move faster (with more torque).
The trouble Intel has is that they drop down a gear then rev 6 months to a year later.
kamper - Sunday, February 1, 2004 - link
Just curious, Anand or Derek: what board did you use to get the 3.72 GHz oc? Obviously it wasn't the intel board used in the benches. I guess we'll hear all about this in the compatibility review though :)keep up the good work, that last point about smaller margins at higher clockspeeds (vs. Northwood) was cool. Let's just hope the pattern continues.
Stlr22 - Sunday, February 1, 2004 - link
Seems to me like people either got cought up in some of the hype and expected to much or some people expected to little and that history would repeat itself (Willamette vs Palomino)The fact that the Prescott fared much better in it's launch compared to the Willamette might be a hint to not underestimate it. Prescott isn't really looking bad now, and I think it will hit stride faster then the Willamette core did.
The next couple of years are gonna be really interesting.
Damn, ya just gotta love it!
ntrights - Sunday, February 1, 2004 - link
Great review!KF - Sunday, February 1, 2004 - link
I've grown to appreciate CRAMITPAL. If you read around the opinionated diatribes, he has some good stuff that people avoid saying for fear of retaliation. I suppose if I were in love with Intel, he would tick me off.But, it does look like Intel has created a CPU that should ramp up to speeds high enough to beat the A64 in 32bit mode, and that is all they needed to do.
Regardless of how much heat that is going to take, Intel must have some way in the works to handle it.
Looks like they might not charge an arm and leg for it, which is the biggest shock.