Re: Pentium Processors
They may still be Prescott, but they do run cooler the the previous Prescott cores. They have Intel Speed Step biult into them, this is a 1st for the Prescots.
The 'New' Prescot also has a slightly larger Die area, so cooling is more effective.
I have a question for Intel. These CPU's are a good bit different than the previous Precot Pentium 4's, so why call them Prescot at all? Would a new name not be better suited? after all, the L2 cache is doubled, speed step technology, 90nm process, an extra 44 million add transistors and a few other bells'n'whistles. Including NX bit and that carry on. In real effect, it's quite unsimilar to the old prescot core, with only the extra instructions and more stages in it's pipline from the original Prescot.
People will say that most of these features were in the original Prescot and just disabled. Some were also not there at all. Now that the new P4's have all these features and are enabled, why are the still called the Prescot cores, and for that matter, why are they still called Pentium 4's? I'm sure there very different from the original Willemate P4.
I seen on a benchmark, Jack, that the 530 P4 was the same temperature idle than what the 630 (same clock speed) under full load.
I laugh at Intel on how they released this CPU. As far as the tech comunity is concernd, the Prescot is a no-go crap CPU. But, If they released it as the P5, P4-64 or even just changred the name of the core, the tech comunity and perhaps the average PC buyer would take more notice.
In my point of view, this is the best CPU to come out of Intel since the last bunch of P3's or even the P2 for that matter. They have most of the features of athlon 64 and more (SSE3, Hyperthreading, 2MB Cache, e.t.c.) and this is why I personally think it would be a better CPU in the long run. However, the Athlon 64 still beats it in gaming, and for the rest of the benchmarks they more or less are neck and neck, depending on the application (except from video encoding and multi-tasking, where the P4 still excels). The Athlon also runs cooler and uses it's integrated memory controller instead of relying on the northbridge for such things, however, Intels current support for DDR2 (AMD has none as of yet) has started to norrow the gap in memory benchmarks. In 64bit benchmarks, the Intel are actually just above par with the Athlon 64 except still in gaming, where the athlon still reigns supream.
One thing to remember though, is that I'm saying that this current CPU is better in the long run compared to current Athlon 64's, however, upgrading is different. Intel's dual core CPU's will need slight modifications to the LGA775 platform that no current motherboard and chipset support, wheas the dual core CPU's from AMD are planned to be compatible with todays SKT939 motherboards.
I reckon in future when more programs are written with hyperthreading, SSE3 and the more cache being usefull for 64bit compiled code (larger than 32bit), the Pentium 4 will succed over the Athlon 64.
If you want gaming and/or value for money, and easier upgrading go the Athlon 64 route.
If you are building a PC that will not be getting upgraded in the forseable future, and only used for moderate gamming, AND/OR for video encoding go for the intel P4 6xx series.
This is my own educated opinion, and hence no flaming!
Delta: "What's wrong Chris?? Chris: "I miss my old Cyrix"