Single Core Desktop

Now for desktop processing; we have good news and better news. The good news is almost all desktop Prescotts (including the Celerons) will get a 64-bit makeover real soon. Unfortunately, you'll still need to buy a new processor but the roadmaps indicate there will be virtually no price premium on the 64-bit versions. With Windows XP 64-bit release less than a few months away, it makes sense that Intel's 64-bit push comes strong and hard in the 9th inning. We are particularly interested in how fully committed the roadmap details EM64T; even the puny Celerons get the instructions. You may recall that the Socket 754 Sempron processors are nearly identical to AMD's Athlon 64 processors with half the cache and the 64-bit instructions removed. It will be interesting to see how the two companies play this against each other as AMD will be the 32-bit SKU on the desktop when WinXP Pro x64 launches.

Just to detail the whole outline for 64-bit Socket 775 processors, here is a quick roadmap of what we have to look forward to:

Intel Single Core Mid Range Desktop Lineup LGA775
Processor Speed L2 Cache FSB Launch
Pentium 4 XE 3.73GHz 3.73GHz 2MB 1066MHz Soon
Pentium 4 XE 3.46GHz 3.43GHz 512KB 1066MHz Nov 2004
Pentium 4 571 3.80GHz 1MB 800MHz Q2'05
Pentium 4 561 3.60GHz 1MB 800MHz Q2'05
Pentium 4 551 3.40GHz 1MB 800MHz Q2'05
Pentium 4 541 3.20GHz 1MB 800MHz Q2'05
Pentium 4 531 3.00GHz 1MB 800MHz Q2'05
Pentium 4 521 2.80GHz 1MB 800MHz Q2'05
Celeron D 355 3.33GHz 256KB 533MHz Q4'05
Celeron D 351 3.20GHz 256KB 533MHz Q2'05
Celeron D 346 3.06GHz 256KB 533MHz Q2'05
Celeron D 341 2.93GHz 256KB 533MHz Q2'05
Celeron D 336 2.80GHz 256KB 533MHz Q2'05
Celeron D 331 2.66GHz 256KB 533MHz Q2'05
Celeron D 326 2.53GHz 256KB 533MHz Q2'05

As you can see, the EM64T enabled CPUs have incremented their model numbers by 1 relative to their non-EM64T counterparts. We're glad that Intel is making a clear distinction between the two variants, rather than simply adding a new suffix. Where there is no earlier part, like the 3.33GHz Celeron D, the model numbers do not have the +1.

The 3.73GHz Pentium 4 EE will show up real soon, if that's your thing, and it will become the second processor to support 1066FSB. We haven't been real impressed with the 1066FSB launch thus far, and a 300MHz bump in clock speed doesn't strike us as something that will revolutionize the performance desktop anytime soon either. However, keep in mind this new P4EE is very different from the previous 3.46GHz revision, and with a different core we may see a very different performance curve on the 1066MHz front side bus. The rest of the Intel roadmap neglects to mention any other 1066FSB processors, including the dual core behemoths, so the technology is either a little bit ahead of its time or simply a temporary dead end.

Next we have the great news. Not only will we see the launch of four Prescott 2M/Iriwindale processors next month, but soon after we will also get our first taste of Smithfield - several quarters ahead of what the previous roadmap had anticipated! Prescott 2M will launch with four SKUs listed below, along with a "670" model clocked at 3.8GHz sometime shortly after.

Intel Single Core Performance Desktop Lineup LGA775
Processor Speed L2 Cache FSB Launch
Pentium 4 670 3.80GHz 2MB 800MHz Q2'05
Pentium 4 660 3.60GHz 2MB 800MHz Q1'05
Pentium 4 650 3.40GHz 2MB 800MHz Q1'05
Pentium 4 640 3.20GHz 2MB 800MHz Q1'05

Like the other Prescott processors, Prescott 2M will launch with EM64T and XD, but it adds Enhanced Speed Step (EIST) as well. EIST is very similar to AMD's Cool n' Quiet as it dynamically ramps the clock speed of the processor to conserve thermals and power. However, the big difference between CnQ and EIST is maturity - EIST has existed in some form or another since the earliest days of the P6 architecture. How EIST will affect performance on everyday desktop processing - particularly on a processor with such a high clock speed - we leave for the actual launch date sometime next month.

Index Dual Core Desktop Processors


View All Comments

  • JGunther - Tuesday, May 31, 2005 - link

    Wow, what a glowing review of Intel's upcoming technologies from Anandtech. Seems strange that this website should think so highly of the NetBurst architechure, considering how roundly criticized it is on other websites...

    So I guess Anandtech thinks Intel's technology is going to come out on top of AMD's next year? Guess time will tell on that one...
  • deathwalker - Wednesday, March 2, 2005 - link

    Well..I'm from the old school..."show me". Intel hasn't shown me a thing in the last 2 years..and Im not about to give them a pat on the back now. Until they put a product in the hands of the consumer that is clearly better than what AMD has on the table they won't be getting any of my hard earned Computer toys play money, and, they will have to put it in the market place at a price that is competitive with AMD. Reply
  • flatblastard - Tuesday, March 1, 2005 - link

    I can't help but wonder if my p4 660 would find any performance gains with the upcoming 945/955 chipset, if compatible at all. Probably not, but theres always hope, right? Reply
  • KristopherKubicki - Saturday, February 19, 2005 - link

    kiwistag: A good point - but i think some internal documents I have seen lean twoard the idea of licensing per socket (instead of processor). Obviously, BSD/Linux won't care if you install 4 logical processors. I would not be surprised if the x64 Windows XP comes out with some little tweaks to the license and install base to take into account multiple sockets/processors.

  • kiwistag - Wednesday, February 16, 2005 - link

    One thing that is missing from all the discussion is what O.S's will support the new Processors?

    This might sound silly but...

    Windows XP & 2000 Pro both support up to 2 processors, Hyperthreading or not if you have a Dual core with Hyperthreading, 2K/XP seeing 4 Processors it won't install. Only Server editions will allow this. Then again, Linux will just slurp up the new CPU's and not miss a heartbeat :P
  • RoosterKooster - Wednesday, February 16, 2005 - link

    NEC's v20 was a popular replacement for the intel 8088. There were some compatibility issues but I can't remember what they were. I think I used a V20 in a couple XT-Clones. Yea baby!
  • OokiiNeko - Tuesday, February 15, 2005 - link

    #51 "K6 and earlier CPUs were thoroughly outclassed by Intel chips."

    You're showing your age. Look up the AMD 486 DX 4/100.

    Now I'm showing my age ;>)
  • flloyd - Monday, February 7, 2005 - link

    Does anyone know what advances GMA 950 will have compared to GMA 900? I'm going to be upgrading soon and will use my computer mostly for a office work and HTPC so integrated graphics should be enough for me but it would be nice to have a slightly faster graphics for very light gaming. Reply
  • Ozenmacher - Sunday, February 6, 2005 - link

    Lol, now that is funny...and rather embarassing for that author I would suppose. But don't worry, your articles are well written and i sensed no bias in it at all. Reply
  • KristopherKubicki - Thursday, February 3, 2005 - link

    Ozenmacher: There was one time where "testes" slipped past the copy editor instead of "tests"... that was fun...


Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now