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
Availability, Yields and Overclocking
Intel’s 90nm fabs are working hard at cranking out Prescotts as fast as possible, but as is the case at the start of any ramp there will be supply issues. We are hearing that widespread availability of chips in the channel for people like us to order won’t be until March 1st, although you should be able to find OEMs with systems available immediately.
We are also hearing from reliable sources that the current steppings of Prescotts coming out of the fabs are performing very well. To get an idea for what sort of headroom to expect we conducted some informal overclocking tests on our Pentium 4 3.20E that we had for testing.
We conducted all tests using just air cooling and we kept the CPU voltage at its default of 1.385V:
An effortless overclock gave us 3.72GHz; we could POST at 4GHz but we didn’t want to showcase what was ultimately possible with Prescott, rather what was easily attainable without increasing voltages.
Intel could have launched Prescott at higher clock speeds than they did, however it seems that their desire to produce as many mainstream Prescotts as possible (2.80E in particular) won out in this case.
Update: Intel has released the official thermal data on Prescott:
Thermal Design Power | |
---|---|
Northwood (2.8 - 3.4GHz) |
69 - 89W |
Prescott (2.8 - 3.4GHz) |
89 - 103W |
As we mentioned before, if you thought Prescott was going to be cooler running you'd be wrong. Prescott is one hot running CPU, now keep in mind that these aren't actual production thermals rather Intel's guidelines to manufacturers as to what thermals they should design cooling for. Needless to say, Prescott at 2.8GHz will be about as hot as a 3.4GHz Northwood. When Intel ramps up beyond 3.6GHz we'll definitely see some larger heatsinks being used on Pentium 4 platforms; some of the preliminary cooling setups we've seen for Tejas were insane.
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.