Intel Announces Pentium 4 388
A friend of mine pointed me at this press release telling us about Intel's brand-new, shockingly original name (and logo) for the series of processors formerly code-named 'Willamette.' Meanwhile, I'll sit back and wait to see the logo parodies. Thanks to David Hageman.
Re:numbering system (Score:4)
Flamage from a classic Cadillac owner (Score:1)
I'll have you know that I'd take a 20- to 30-year-old Cadillac over any of these new "luxury" cars or "sports" cars. I am the proud owner of a 1974 Cadillac Coupe deVille, and it is a better running, better riding car than ANYTHING I've driven that was built in the last 2 decades. That old car handles beautifully, smoothly, and comfortably, and new cars, even new Cadillacs, just don't compare favorably --- they truly don't make them like they used to. Plus, it actually looks like a car, complete with stylized fins in the back and a front grille that makes fucking semi trucks skittish, not this pussyfoot aerodynamic BLOB that "modnern 'njineerin" has cursed mankind with.
(Of course, nowadays they sell plastic wind-up toys instead of manly, sturdy, American, steel CARS, and the public just loves it, so who am I to judge.)
Rev. Dr. Xenophon Fenderson, the Carbon(d)ated, KSC, DEATH, SubGenius, mhm21x16
Whats next? (Score:5)
Re:AMD's more creative (Score:2)
...even if it is the name of a sports magazine in the US (which much of the rest of the world would call a "sport magazine", I suspect :-)).
It's also the name of an "integrated marketing communications firm" [athlon.com], who say, on their What is an Athlon? [athlon.com] page:
(Yeah, I know, the third paragraph falls under the heading of "blah blah blah blah blah".)
It sounds like a brand of paint or something - "New all-weather Duron - stands up to sun, rain, hail...."
I always liked the Compaq Contura, which sounded as if it belonged on the racks in the drugstore right next to the Durexes and Trojans ("ribbed for her pleasure").
Re:Wouldn't it be cool if cars were named by Intel (Score:3)
New category! (Score:2)
x86 Evolution (Score:5)
80486DX - Internal FPU
At this point, Intel became involved with several lawsuits because they didn't want AMD and Cyrix to relabel and resell their chips under the x86 names anymore, so they switched to:
Pentium (P5-4) - On-board cache
Pentium MMX (P5-5C) - MMX
Pentium Pro (P6) - On-die cache
Pentium II (P6; Deschutes, Mendocino) - On-card cache
Celeron (P6; Mendocino) - No L2 cache
Celeron-A (P6; Mendocino) - On-die cache
Pentium !!! (P6; Katmai) - On-card cache, KNI/SSE
Pentium !!! (P6; Coppermine) - On-die cache
Celeron II (P6; Coppermine) - On-die cache
Pentium 4 (P7; Williamette)
The primary differences between the original, deschutes, mendocino, and coppermine cores are:
1) Size of L1 cache
2) Size, speed, and location of L2 cache
3) Die layout
4) Packaging
5) x86 enhancements (MMX, SSE)
These changes ultimately resulted in:
1) Higher attainable clock speeds
2) Higher per-clock performance
Traditionally, a chip attains a new architecture identifier (ie, 486, 586) when the actual processing path changes. The Athlon was considered 786 material simply because they made massive improvements to the floating point unit, and because it utilized a completely new bus protocol (EV6 vs. GTL+). All of Intel's processors starting with the Pentium Pro up through the Pentium III Coppermine are considered 'P6' or '686' by many simply because it hasn't changed.
Take a Pentium Pro 200 and a Coppermine and do the following:
1) Downclock to 200, 66MHz FSB
2) Disable the L1 and L2 caches
3) Disable the x86 enchancements (MMX and SSE)
And although I am no engineer and I do not work for Intel, I can almost guarantee that both processors will give you the same performance.
If you try the same for any scenario, 386 vs. 486, Pentium II vs. Williamette (P-4), whatever, you will probably achieve entirely different performance marks. The Williamette, from what I've seen, is a completely revamped x86 architecture.
On the other hand, many people prefer to separate generations by per-clock performance, including cache changes and x86 extensions. The then you would have Pentium = P5, Pentium MMX/Pentium Pro/Pentium II/Pentium III (Katmai) = P6, Pentium III (Coppermine) = P7, and Pentium 4 = P8. The problem with this method is that it is open for interpretation. It's obvious to me that the Coppermine cannot be grouped with the original Pentium II, but Joe Q. Techhead may not agree with me.
Or we could take Intel's word for it (which is what they obviously want us to do) and believe that the Pentium, Pentium II, Pentium III, and Pentium 4 processors each have their own bevy of industry-dominating performance.
Enjoy the flamebait.
Alakaboo
Re:Same ol', same ol' (Score:2)
"Same old product" only in the sense that it executes the x86 instruction set. It has a new processor core, i.e. not the core used in the Pentium Pro, Pentium II, Pentium III, and Celeron; it's not just a tweaked PIII.
Re:Penta-who? (Score:2)
Obviously "we" do, or else this story wouldn't have made the front page and gotten over a hundred comments that weren't "me too", "natalie portman w/ hot grits et. al.", or "first..nth post".
why its pentium4 and not hexium,octium, etc... (Score:4)
Wouldn't it be cool if cars were named by Intel? (Score:5)
Dodge Two
Dodge Three
Dodge Delta
Dodge Delta 2
Dodge Delta 3
Dodge Delta Delta
Which gets me thinking.. "Pentium 5" is kind of redundant in some weird way. Maybe they'll call it Pentium Squared?
Logo (Score:2)
Disclaimer: "These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be yours too"
Re:Pentium 4 = Funeral Knell for PowerPC? (Score:3)
Re:x86 Evolution (Score:2)
Actually the PPro had the cache on a separate die on the same chip package, unlike the CeleronA and Coppermine, which have the cache in the CPU die itself.
Re:Top 10 Other Names Considered for Pentium 4 (Score:3)
seeing those words set off a random train of thought that involved goatse.cx, was heavily enhanced by large amounts of sleep deprevation, and ended with me idly asking myself the question: is pentium.cx taken?
I immediately realized it was a dumb question; why would anyone want pentium.cx and what would they _do_ with it?
I would have immediately forgotten it, except i suddenly realized something that made me wonder if maybe it isn't such a dumb question after all. Alright, think about this for a minute:
It's pretty clear that intel's naming scheme no longer directly relates to reality. Moreover, the scism is getting more extreme over time. From the pentium to the pentium 2 to the pentium 3 to the pentium 4, the differences in the chip have become less apparent in usefulness and much more arbitrary. From my totally ignorant perspective, it would appear that the pentium 3 was more a marketing construct than it was anything else; just a desperate attempt to stuff a _lot_ more not-very-useful-or-realistic complexity into the pentium instruction set so they could claim "look, we did something!" and have an excuse to run a lot of commercials, just to keep intel in everyone's mind as being cutting-edge, or something. I mean, look, it has something to do with the internet, doesn't it?? and they have cool 3d graphics and a looney toons character in the ad! It must be really advanced!!! d00d L337 1 \V1LL HAVE MY DAD R3PL4C3 MY 0V3RCL0CK3D AMD R16GHT 4W4Y with a PENTIUM 3 and it will MAKE THE INTERNET M0R3 FUN 4ND 1 \V1LL H4XOR BETTER!!!
The pentium 4 seems pure desperation, some extremely vague advancement just to pump the number up one more, just to release a lot of press releases and get people to buy stuff. Just to say, ok, the pentium 3 failed to change the world, but we're still here, and we're still alive and vital and moving!!
If i were going to be paranoid, i'd say the point of the pentium 4 is so intel can make a lot of noise about it to distract us from the IA-64. What about the IA-64, you ask? Say, that's what i want to know exactly.
But whether i'm being too harsh, and whether i know jack shit about microchips, i think i can say with some certainty that with each new "version" of the x86, the real _meaningful_ difference between each processor is getting a good deal smaller with each iteration, and the marketing aspects of a new product launch are overshadowing the technological aspects in intel's mind with each iteration. And i can DEFINATELY say the amount of time between "releases" is getting faster and faster.
My prediction:
From this point, with each "new" chip intel releases, the fluff value of the release will increase exponentially, the time between releases will decrease exponentially, and the justification for changing numbers will decrease exponentially. Eventually, intel will get to the point where they assign a different Pentium Number for each different clockrate assignment.
Thus about two years from now, Intel will have reached the point of the Pentium 110-- which they will name the Pentium CX [roman numerals!] -- and register the domain pentium.cx for it, to commemorate the Pentium CX's simultaneous release with "Windows ME harder"!
But who knows how much the tech industry will have changed by then? Hell, by that point, there may even be multiple-core G4s on the market.
(Score:0, Gibberish)
Re:Wouldn't it be cool if cars were named by Intel (Score:2)
Re:Penta-who? (Score:2)
Intel confidential email about P4 chip layout! (Score:3)
---------------------------
To: Head Cheese of Intel
From: P4 project manager
Re: P4 chip layout
Message:
The die layout of the latest revision of the prototype P4 is in the attached JPEG. Here's the rundown of the labelled sections:
1. 11,290,491 transistors: CISC-to-RISC conversion. Handles a bunch of 1978 legacy bullshit.
2. I know this looks like just a dot on the chip, but it turned out the MMX stuff could be done with only eight transistors.
3. 12 Superpipelined floating point units: We designed them so that hopefully the next version of Excel will run tolerably, but we're not getting our hopes up.
4. Instruction scheduler: Arranges instructions in the fastest manner possible for those too wussy to use assembler.
5. We etched in a proposal from you to your secretary like you asked.
6. 453 transistors, 35 varicaps, four inductors and an op amp: I think this was put in while someone was drunk, but everything stops working if we take it out.
This is how I play old school games. (Score:5)
Take your k-spiff pentium III 950 and turn off cache. Boot windows. Have fun in your misery. THis is how I slow games enough to play them on my 450. Gabriel knight works just fine without cache.
But they're on the pentium *four* (Score:2)
So shouldn't it be octium? That almost sounds good.
You forgot (Score:2)
---
Re:Oooh what's next pentium 5? Isn't that redundan (Score:2)
Isn't "-ium" a Latin ending? In which case, wouldn't the unmixed version be "Quintium" rather than "Pentium"?
Re:Wouldn't it be cool if cars were named by Intel (Score:3)
reminds me of that old pentium joke... (Score:3)
exactly 1.8342210020334565635623561
but 2 is close enough.
all hail the thunderbird!
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
Re:Top 10 Other Names Considered for Pentium 4 (Score:2)
"Cementing the break"? That metaphor was well mixed. Shaken, or stirred?
Re:x86 Evolution (Score:3)
...
The PPro would stall if you mixed 8bit/16bit/32bit register uses inside it's rename engine. The P-II and on didn't (well, not just because they are mixed size uses at least). That may seem minor, but it makes a huge diffrence to Win95 and Win98 (and maybe WinME).
The P-III has 3 decoders, rather then the two the P-I, P-II, and PPro had.
The cache archatecture, and interfaces to the cache have changed a lot. Don't under estimate this, cache control logic is a very big part of modern CPUs (not to be confused with cache memory, which is almost all of the CPU by transistor count!).
Somewhere between the PPro and the P-III some really close to non-deterministic functional unit allocation went away (so code doesn't get faster by putting NOPs in hard to guess places...only in easy to guess places like aligning loops to cache lines).
Oh, and of corse pipestages have been added, work has been juggled between them, and things have been re-layed out to allow process shrinks and clock speed bumps.
The changes between the PPro, P-II, and P-III are at least as big as between the 68000 and 68010. That is to say, not huge, but not trivial things an intern could have done.
Find a compiler writer (a good one) and ask them the diffrences. They are pretty sizable.
Of corse they arn't as big as the diffrence between the AMD K6 and the K7, but, well, that's another story.
Re:Pentium 4 = Funeral Knell for PowerPC? (Score:2)
The only way PPC systems would match x86 in price would be to have a large enough open systems market rivalling the PClone market. I was doing that in '97 when Apple pulled the plug. And while moving into the set-top box business from there has our stock some 20x higher than in the Maclone days, I'm still bitter. Not just because Apple proved to be the dicks everyone kept telling me they'd be (no, they've really changed, I met with the CHRP group myself), but simply that the PPC's good enough. It deserves success.
After that fell blow, neither Morotola nor IBM has felt particularly compelled to race with Intel just for Apple's sake. When phone or internet switches or other high-end embedded gear need an upgrade, they'll crank out a faster chip (like IBM's forthcoming PPC750 update, starting out at 700MHz). With all that copper and SOI and all, it's not like IBM couldn't deliver if they wanted to.
Re:When I switched from Suns it was to Athlon. (Score:2)
"non-support"? You mean the one-week (one month?) stonewall, followed by the biggest CPU recall program in history?
So, ok, it was a crappy thing for them to do, but you make it sound like they didn't come through at all. Which is pretty far from what happened.
I have a K7 too, but more because it was a better bang for my buck then because of a PR disasater half a decade ago!
Wow, my brand new P3 is now even more outdated (Score:4)
Any idea if Intel is EVER going to change the name? I doubt it. "Pentium" is such a household name, and whenever it is mentioned, the average person recognizes it, and associates it with a fast computer. Intel has succeeded in making sure EVERYONE knows its product name..
Re:It's just hard to believe. (Score:2)
2. The few that are supposedly new are well known
3. So everyone is taking a piss at the PRdrones and the "YetAnotherMeaninglessPieceofPRBulshit" with no info in it. And at the logo of course. When you start being a laughing stock you usually go a very long way... It is almost as bad the new SGI logo. And I bet it is inroduced for the same purpose - to be rendered easier as MS Word clipart. If you do not understand what I mean try to make the old SGI logo in the form of a windows metafile suitable for clipshit, err... sorry clipart.
Re:Oooh what's next pentium 5? Isn't that redundan (Score:2)
"Pentium" and "Hextium" are the bastard offspring of Greek prefix and Latin suffix here....
Great news! (Score:5)
Re:New category! (Score:2)
Actually, my favorite stupid name of the hour is the artist formerly known as BBN, which finally IPOed this week under the name Genuity. Presumably, it's the opposite if ingenuity. Woo-hoo.
When I switched from Suns it was to Athlon. (Score:2)
For the hardware I chose the top-end Athlon.
Reasons:
- No serial number inside.
- Great price/performance.
- Intel's non-support history with the Pentium math bug.
Re:Logo (Score:5)
Si
Re:reminds me of that old pentium joke... (Score:2)
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
Oooh what's next pentium 5? Isn't that redundant? (Score:4)
BTW the correct link is her e [intel.com].
Re:Wouldn't it be cool if cars were named by Intel (Score:2)
Pentium 4 = Funeral Knell for PowerPC? (Score:2)
With no other advantage besides ColorSync, cute cases, and a (finally) solid operating system, what the hell is going to happen to the platform that was to bring us 'affordable, scalable RISC Processing'?
I hate to think it's necessary, but I may end up with a space heater (P4/Athlon) in my computer.
Oops (Score:2)
natalieportmanium?
TrollMaster i4x86?
never mind...
Real meaning of pentium reveiled (Score:2)
Pentium stands for Produces erroneous numbers through incorrect understanding of mathematics.
This would explain a lot, if I only new what.
---
Re:x86 Evolution (Score:2)
The PPro would stall if you mixed 8bit/16bit/32bit register uses inside it's rename engine. The P-II and on didn't (well, not just because they are mixed size uses at least). That may seem minor, but it makes a huge diffrence to Win95 and Win98 (and maybe WinME).
I thought the thing that really sped up Win9x on the P2 vs the PPro was the fact that they added segment register caches. Win9x switches segments a lot when compared to code which was designed for a flat memory model and so the CPU spends a lot of time reloading the segment information from the LDT/GDT if there is no cache there (30 or 40 cycles possibly). I was under the impression the rename engine was fairly consistent across the whole P6 architecture.
John Wiltshire
Is it time yet? (Score:3)
If they sell enough of these we'll start hearing stories about "Intel brownouts"...
Thats a press release? (Score:5)
I hate these names... (Score:2)
While I am half-joking here, I seriously though want them to stop adding on numbers to the Pentium and go to the next logical name. Let's see, doesn't it go Pent, Sex, Sept, Oct, Non, Dec?...so would that make this the Sexium? Or perhaps that was the Pentium II, and this is actually the Octium?
And the slogan will be ... (Score:3)
This parallels ... (Score:3)
Re:Top 10 Other Names Considered for Pentium 4 (Score:4)
Actually, the Pentium 4 is a very drastic change from the P3. It has an entirely new core, with some interesting new ideas (trace cache, "double pumped" ALUs). However, whether or not it is any good remains to be seen. Your comment that it is just a marketing exercise may very well prove to be true anyway.
You see, the P4 has a 20 stage pipeline. Now that's a lot compared to most chips, meaning that it will take a huge penalty for a branch misprediction. What's the advantage of a 20 stage pipeline? Clockspeed. The P4 was designed first and foremost for clockspeed, because that's all the clueless average computer user looks at. There's a very good possibility that the P4 will perform worse at the same clockspeed than the P3, but it will reach some insane clockspeeds. This is especially true in floating-point operations. The P4 only has one FPU while even the P3 has two (the Athlon has three). That just doesn't cut the mustard these days.
Of course, intel is banking on SSE2 to make up for their pathetic FPU, but that has to be specifically supported in the application. Anything FPU intensive and without SSE2 support will perform much better on a P3 than a P4 of the same clockspeed. Of course, intel will base all their bencharks on the miniscule number of applications that will support SSE2 (and pressure third-party benchmark makers to include SSE2 support as well), so they'll have a bunch or pretty graphs showing that the P4 is super-duper fast.
Re:Top 10 Other Names Considered for Pentium 4 (Score:2)
But anyhow....
Re:Flamage from a classic Cadillac owner (Score:2)
But its still a V8, and that simple fact makes it guzzle more gas (and pollute more by extention) than any (well tuned) 4 or 6 cilinder car.
Which makes me wonder: why do we buy cars that can do 200Km per hour when in most countries the speed limit rarely reaches above 140km per hour? Particularly in the cities, where you seldom get the machine beyond the 90km per hour mark...
But then again... people buy Pentium III's at 800Mhz only to surf the internet and write letters in M$Word...
Re:Wouldn't it be cool if cars were named by Intel (Score:5)
Top 10 Other Names Considered for Pentium 4 (Score:5)
9) Whupamdassium
8) Fnordium
7) Pengium (Thus really cementing the break with Microsoft)
6) Really obscenely fast processor
5) Notcreativeenoughium
4) 886
3) Just another damn IA32 chip
2) Killappleium
And the number one other considered name for the Pentium 4:
1) Livegoatpornium
My god... (Score:4)
-={(.Y.)}=-
Intel AC (Score:2)
Hmmm. Just in time for summer. Now, Dell, Gateway, etc. can advertise their boxes are dual use.
Window air conditioner ;-)
----
Just makes you wonder... (Score:3)
Unlucky 4? (Score:2)
Re:Intel confidential email about P4 chip layout! (Score:2)
Re:Oooh what's next pentium 5? Isn't that redundan (Score:2)
hexium, sextium, heptium, septium and all plausible variations.
Re:why its pentium4 and not hexium,octium, etc... (Score:2)
I knew there was a reason I did all the research for this [slashdot.org] post!
Basically some guy named Eric Rosenfield (I think it was Rosenfield, could have been Rosenfeld or some variant) owns Hexium. He used to own Sextium, but abandoned it on June 16, 2000 (hmm...). Intel Corporation owns Septium, however.
And just in! (or, just searched for...) This Eric Rosenfeld (whoops, sorry about that) character also owned Octium, but abandoned that on June 16, 2000 as well! Apparently, someone (I wonder who) filed for opposition on January 31, 1995, which is about five months before Intel registered Septium.
Nonium and Decium are not registered. I guess nobody thought Intel would release a 986 or 1086.
Re:Wow, my brand new P3 is now even more outdated (Score:3)
Sure, to the average person Pentium == fast. But geeks hear "Alpha" and start drooling all over themselves.
The Intel 986 (Score:3)
--
Re:Just makes you wonder... (Score:5)
I'm sure I'm the first.... (Score:2)
So, don't the big guys that post the stories have that neat 'preview' thingy so that they can check their links? Perhaps that's how all the typos and grammer oopses get into the stories. Either that or they just scramble to see who can post a particular story first.
Same ol', same ol' (Score:2)
Interesting quote... (Score:4)
Oh yeah, my Pentium 120 just screams.
Re:Top 10 Other Names Considered for Pentium 4 (Score:2)
Branding (Score:5)
Still, I'm glad they called it that. It beats Celeron, Athelon, and Duron.
NEWS FLASH: THE INTEL ODIUM (Score:3)
Rumors that Intel might be working on the Intel Oxgen, the Urnium, or the Lutonium processors were vigorously denied by the company.
Additional press releases (Score:5)
"Earlier today, seven intel engineers were incinertated in a systems-test accident. The incident occurred on power-up of the test-bed of Intel's new quad-P4 board, codenamed Phoenix. Witnesses describe the cause as 'spontaneous combustion'. 'The damn thing just blew', said one engineer, 'and then everything was just a ball of fire! I'm sure glad I got out of there alive... Sources report that Intel management has reportedly been talking to executives at Frigidaire regarding the incident."
It's very iMac (Score:2)
It's about as inspiring as SGI's new logo.
Re:Wouldn't it be cool if cars were named by Intel (Score:2)
BTW the PC586 was a pain to configure, compared to the then current 3Com cards.
New names... (Score:2)
Copout(TM)
Crap(TM)
----------------------
At least they aren't doing the 3DFX design model.
Voodoo 1 = Revolutionary technology
Voodoo 2 = 2 Voodoo 1's
Voodoo 3 = Newer design, more memory, AGP
Voodoo 5 = 2 Voodoo 3's, MORE VRAM THAN YOUR SDRAM
----------------------
All I want in a processor is 512k of integrated L2 cache that runs at full clockspeed, and a 200mhz bus. Is that too much?
Re:This parallels ... (Score:2)
Well, Intel does seem to have a tendency lately to announce products that you can't actually buy. And while the P-IV core is actually supposed to be pretty good (ie they finally have moved past the PPro/PII/PIII core), whether or not anyone will actually be able to buy one is rather debatable (based on their current supply problems with the P-IIIs). Not the mention all the problems Intel has had with their chipsets, fscking hell, it's nuts. And the RDRAM fiasco hasn't helped either.
AMD has taken a huge chunk of Intel's market, but who knows, maybe they might be able to make a comeback?
To be realistic, Intel still has a big chunk of the market (80% maybe?). AMD is doing very well for itself, I agree, but they're nowhere near putting Intel out of business yet. And honestly I would prefer it if they just kept competing with each other, with about 50/50 market share, each producing better and cheaper CPUs until the end of time. Though all I want in the short term is for AMD to come out with SMP chipsets (770... yummy) and then I'll get a dual Thunderbird or Mustang box.
Re:no page (Score:2)
"In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is ostracised as a troublemaker" - Deefer
Strong data typing is for those with weak minds.
Re:Oooh what's next pentium 5? Isn't that redundan (Score:4)
> it might boost sales...
Sorry, you're mixing Latin and Greek. The
successor to the "Pentium" would logically be
the "Hexium"--which admittedly isn't as funny but
does have its own possiblities. The "Sextium"
would have to be the successor to the "Quintium".
Chris Mattern
Pentium is a household name (Score:5)
Most people not only associate "Pentium" with "fast processor", they associate "Pentium" with "any processor".
True story: I was in my local Drat Shack (which also has a section devoted to amateur radio gear and other "stuff" on consignment) and this kid (who, for the record, seemed to believe "soap" was a four letter word) comes in. He starts looking at this old Pentium 75 that is stuck into a block of plain old styrofoam (can you say ESD? I thought you could). "Ouuuuh, would this work in my computer? I have a pentium-486." As you can tell, it went downhill from there. Fast.
Intel has poured gigadollars into making this the case: people ask what kind of Pentium is in their Macs, or in my Indy, or whatnot. Intel's execs would sooner chew off their own testicles than change that name.
That logo, must have cost a fortune! (Score:2)
Sometimes it seems I'm in the wrong line of work, but then I end up having too much fun one day and it becomes worth it.
the AC
Re:reminds me of that old pentium joke... (Score:3)
Re:The Intel 986 (Score:2)
--Shoeboy
Haiku (Score:2)
The eighth generation chip
Should be "Octium"
numbering system (Score:5)
--
Re:The Intel 986 (Score:3)
Pentium was the 586, p-pro was the 686, this'll be the 786.
--Shoeboy
Re:Wow, my brand new P3 is now even more outdated (Score:2)
The average consumer -- and, frankly, even a fairly schmart geek like me -- tends to not feel that there's a whole lot of difference between a Pentium II and Pentium III or 4.
Probably because in all other markets, a same-named product is just a slightly updated product. A '99 Miata looks and performs a whole lot like a '01 Miata. Tide with Bleach seems to perform a lot like Tide with Enzymes.
The Pentium name just doesn't differentiate. Intel could release a Pentium-I 900 and it would outsell a Pentium-4 700...
Of course, anyone with a clue is buying Duron. Best bang for the buck...
--
AMD's more creative (Score:2)
As someone said earlier, the word Pentium has become so vague, you no longer know whether you're talking about a puny 75MHz granpa or an 850MHz beast.
Can't wait for those SMP Athlon boards
Re:Thats a press release? (Score:2)
I have C comment blocks longer (and more informative) then that press release.
Dude, I just about died laughing when I read that. Well said!!
The Second Amendment Sisters [sas-aim.org]
Re:Pentium 4 = Funeral Knell for PowerPC? (Score:3)
Kicking it at what? Alphas are moving
--Shoeboy
Re:x86 Evolution (Score:2)
Well, the PPro apparently had some odd configuration issues with 16 bit code, so it's possible that the PPro would run slower than a PII+.
Additionally, don't forget that MMX and SSE in the PII and PIII are utilized by lots of low-level drivers nowadays; so you might get noticable performance boosts.
Also, to my knowledge, there were tiny memory access tweaks added to PII+ lines. Of course, this might be moot since the majority of delay would be from the lack of cache.
I agree that there is a problem with differentiating CPU generations. I would stand behind a naming convention based on radically differing designs, such as pipelining, integrated caching, out of order execution, parallel execution ( e.g. multi-threading or even multi-processing on die ), or even the crusoe approach. From this stand-point, the Pentium would be one generation, the Pro another, the 64bit proc ( from both AMD and Intel ) would be the next while all the little evolutionary upgrades would really just be different model numbers.
There is nothing wrong with Intel naming this the Pentium I, II, III, IV, etc, because they're really just model numbers. The complete model number involves the frequency. The only real argument, as any textbook would support, is when Intel attempts to call this a 7'th or 8'th generation CPU ( which they've tried to do with their PIII line ).
BBC news has (slightly) more informative info. (Score:2)
Re:numbering system (Score:2)
=)
Umm, no.... (Score:3)
Does no one pay attention to uname(1) anymore? :)
The Pentium was the 586; The Pentium Pro was the 686; The Pentium II and III, being merely modifications of the PPro, are also 686. Originally, the Merced was to be the 786, but it looks like they'll be going a whole new route with that, and Willamette (the Pentium 4), being a new chip, will take the 786 label.
Re:Damn, I was hoping they would name it (Score:2)
Re:That logo, must have cost a fortune! (Score:2)
--
No more e-mail address game - see my user info. Time for revenge.
Re:intel may take the pentium line even further (Score:2)
11+ (I guess only checked a couple) seem to be free, anyone want to invest? (given of course that Pentium is a made up name, and a trademark)
Re:Top 10 Other Names Considered for Pentium 4 (Score:3)
4) 886
Oh great... we're only 72 generations away from returning to the 8086...
Naming jokes aside, some comments about performanc (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wow, my brand new P3 is now even more outdated (Score:5)
New motherboard: $200
Rambus RDRAM to replace SDRAM: $11800
The smiles on the faces of Intel and Rambus stockholders: Priceless.
Okay, I tried.
Re:Thats a press release? (Score:2)
-- iCEBaLM
It's all about the Pentiums, baby (Score:2)
I think it's time for some Weird Al [thepentiums.com]
Favorite line: "I should do the world a favor and cap you like Old Yeller"
--
Re:My god... (Score:2)