Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Intel Launches New Pentium Extreme Edition 965 139

RL-20 II Rider writes "Although Intel is hard at work readying their next-gen Conroe core for a proposed 2H '06 release, it seems engineers at the company are still improving upon the existing 65nm Presler core. This review of the brand-new 3.73GHz Pentium Extreme Edition 965 dual-core processor shows that the CPU is based on a new stepping of the Presler core that runs cooler and overclocks higher than older chips, while consuming a bit less power as well."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel Launches New Pentium Extreme Edition 965

Comments Filter:
  • by Mr. Bad Example ( 31092 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @02:58PM (#14973966) Homepage
    Does it only work if you're snowboarding down a hillside and parachuting off a cliff while slamming a Mountain Dew?
    • It's only XTREME if you run Windows and play solitaire on it.
    • Does it only work if you're snowboarding down a hillside and parachuting off a cliff while slamming a Mountain Dew?

      Sorry, you must be thinking of AMD's Athlon 5000++ X4 DDR3 Quad Core Radical Edition.
    • Actually, yes, it does require slammed Dew for cooling; yet, since it's compatible with the poser socket it doesn't require extensive snowboarding, skateboarding, or motocross knowledge to operate. However, Stussy, Etnies, Independent, Think, or Billabong stickers -must- be used to keep the CPU attached via the poser socket. Older models may require Body Glove or T&C Surf Designs stickers. Furthermore, the presence of Hypercolor may be necessary in some cases.

      Case windows are also required for operatio
  • Pentium Name (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hsmith ( 818216 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:00PM (#14973989)
    I thought they were dropping the Pentium name? []
    • Re:Pentium Name (Score:3, Informative)

      by ciroknight ( 601098 )
      This is still the Pentium 4; they're not dropping the Pentium Name on a chip that's still a Pentium, which they're still selling and still are going to sell for about another year until the Core chips take over the market. It's called "Phasing Out" a product in marketing speak.
      • "It's called "Phasing Out" a product in marketing speak."

        Actually the word "milking the dead cow" came to my mind...but "Phasing out" is a pretty good euphemism.
      • Microsoft is also a successful company. Sure it is full of Managers and butt kissers. Every time they RTM they hand out "Kiss-It" awards and I think they have just signed a deal with Amex for butt kissing miles for all they're managers, leads and various other managerial types.
    • by babbling ( 952366 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:25PM (#14974329)
      Intel are so off on this one. Just from a preliminary glance, I can see that they named this chip wrong. "Pentium Extreme Edition 965"? Where should I start?

      First of all, this chip is at the very least an Extreme Turbo Edition 1078. However, I have a strong suspicion about it being closer to a Super Mega Extreme Turbo 8000.
    • You're right, the article title was misleading. The chip is actually the "Extreme Edition 965." Just that. No Intel or Pentium.
    • Pentium still sounds advanced compared to the base architecture: i386
      • Re:Pentium Name (Score:2, Informative)

        by jawtheshark ( 198669 ) *
        Except that it isn't exactly the "base architecture". I don't know for the P-IV, but I do know that both the P-II and P-III were both based on the Pentium Pro [], which introduced the concept of a x86 front-end with a RISC backend.

        Today, if we talk about x86 compatibility, we rarely talk about 386 compatibility. The *least* would be 486DX, since the 386 didn't have FPU. Personally, I consider the PPro to be the current base architecture. Hey, I had a PPro200 and it served our family well as a desktop u []

        • The 80386 didn't have an FPU built in but there was certainly an FPU for it, as well as the 80286 and 8086, They were called 80387, 80287 and 8087 respectively.

          We talk about i386 code all the time. The 286 had support for multitasking OSes, but was awkward to use-- it was something about having to reset the chip to switch tasks. The 386 was the first Intel chip that could run a multitasking system reasonably well, and today it's still the target for the ultimate in backward compatibility. I don't reca

  • It is all about singlethreaded performance, which is not really the same in the coming up Yonah/Merom based cores.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:01PM (#14974001)
    65 nm = 43/16777216 inches
  • by lbmouse ( 473316 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:04PM (#14974040) Homepage
    Colonel Sandurz: Prepare to purchase an Intel Pentium Extreme Edition.
    Dark Helmet: No. No. No. No. Extreme is too slow.
    Colonel Sandurz: Extreme too slow?
    Dark Helmet: Yes. We're gonna have to go straight to an Intel Pentium Ludicrous Edition.
  • My LAMP running Gallery in cached mode gets 11.5 reqs/sec tops running on a 1.7 celeron with 512 ram. If the only variable I changed was the chip to this new sucker, how many reqs/sec might I be able to crank out? They average 30K.
    • 23.1
    • bottleneck order (Score:3, Informative)

      bottleneck order for you: network bandwidth, hard drive, ram, then _maybe_ cpu.

      Basically, it isn't going to help you much. If you put a lot of ram into it that'd probably help (try to get as much into ram as possible). If you have a huge amount of pics (60 gigs) a 10,000 rpm Raptor sata would probably be a good investment.

      All that doesn't mean much if the network pipe is too small to dish out that many pics.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Holy acronyms, Batman.
    • With that your LAMP is CPU bound? What proc is CPU bound apache php or mysql? Considering the specs on yoru system it sounds like IO bound with writes from the database.
  • I wonder how and when they'll spin a core version.
  • Wicked (Score:4, Funny)

    by smoor ( 961352 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:05PM (#14974063)
    Oooh, next they'll the have the Pentium WICKED, followed by the Pentium WOOT!
  • by LibertineR ( 591918 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:05PM (#14974067)
    My AMD Athlon 64 X2 chugs along at 2.2Ghz, and STILL blows Intel out of the water due to its superior design, while managing a cool 29C. AMD has fought the good fight, and until Intel gets faster AND cooler, AMD has my computing dollar. To me, the only thing 'Extreme' about Intel processors right now, is the number of CPU cycles wasted.
    • by ciroknight ( 601098 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:15PM (#14974189)
      Good think Intel invented the Core chips. Because you know, using 40% of the power of a Pentium 4 and doing 40% more work while clocking nearly twice as slow isn't a radical change or anything.

      Preliminary reports even say the Core chips are up to 35% faster than the AMD64 chips, and they don't even have EM64T to fall back on. But, for the purposes of this discussion, since this is a Pentium 4, it is still quite the power hog, but they've made advances with this chip that do warrant some attention (take a look at the benchmarks), and with their new $50 water cooler and overclocking, the Pentium 4 once again takes the performance crown.

      I'm all for AMD, but Intel has cleaned up their act too, and refusing to notice that is a fatal mistake, no matter how much Slashdot/AMD coolaid you've consumed.
      • and refusing to notice that is a fatal mistake

        Yes... you will infact DIE if you have not noticed that.

      • Hey partner, just send me a link. I'm willing to learn. All I know is that I used Intel chips exclusively until last year, and I'll be dammed if I go back without a VERY good reason. Provide a link or somethin'?
        • This was some of the biggest news in a while and it all happened about 1.5 weeks ago (where were you?:P)... Here are some from Anandtech [].

          This one [] is the preliminary benchmark testing that a lot of folks questioned and this one [] is the follow up that answered a lot of the concerns about the first one. The conclusion was the same, though... at 2.66GHz Conroe beats an overclocked 2.8GHz FX-60 (overclocked to simulate the upcoming FX-62) quite handily (20%+ most of the time) while using 1/2 the power of the AMD
          • Well, for most of 1.5 weeks ago, I was flat on my back, sick as a dog. Seriously. Thanks for the links.
          • Pay attention to the details on that testing in the article. This "The AMD system used 1GB of DDR400 running at 2-2-2/1T timings, while the Intel system used 1GB of DDR2-667 running at 4-4-4" Make a HELL of a differnce in performance. Also note they used an Intel Motherboard for the Intel and an DIY (not bad but not the best) for the AMD. They too can make a difference. Seems the reviewers were not looking or didn't want to look either.."Honestly it doesn't make sense for Intel to rig anything here since
            • A little shaky, but not enough to sway the results that much. It looks like the Intel chip is promising. How much will the price the sucker? Lets see what AMD has waiting in the wings.
            • Almost everything you call into question was covered by the second link (the follow-on to the preview). With respect to the timings you mentioned... the DDR2-667 @ 444 should be slower than the DDR400 @ 222/1T in latency and bandwidth. Even then, it isn't a big deal. For example, if you've seen the latest AMD AM2 review from HKEPC (using DDR2-800 at "good" timings for AM2 compared to current S939 with DDR400 at good timings), the current S939 parts with DDR400 win 1/2 the time. The largest gain of AM2 o
        • Provide a link or somethin'?

          Damn, you are one slow motherfucker. Slashdot (and every Apple fan site in the world [], FWIW) has only been going apeshit about the Intel Core chips for what ... at least SEVEN MONTHS NOW [].
      • "twice as slow"

        It would be more accurate to say the chip is "half fast"
      • Hey, I agree wholehartedly, and I've been an AMD fanboy since the release of the P4.

        Anyone who can look at this breakdown of the new Core design [], understand it, and STILL proclaim AMD the performance leader is retarded. The extra simple decoder means potentially 33% more thoroughput out the gate, and the fused micro-ops can add another 5-10% performance improvement (assuming you have enough execution units to use all this). The 128-bit SSE unit, plus the ability for simple decoders to handle packed SSE i
    • Actually the price is pretty Extreme as well.
    • until Intel gets faster AND cooler

      Intel Core Duo, anyone? It has more or less the same performance and it eats less power

      Sure, core duo isn't being used in the entire Intel product line, but being objective I'd say that the best Intel chips (core duo) are starting to look better than the AMD's ones.
  • extreme? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by matt328 ( 916281 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:13PM (#14974165)
    I donno, brand new chip, catchy performance implying name, about the only thing extreme about this chip will be the price. All of you people who get off on bragging about their box's specs in your little forum sigs prepare to shell out your 2 grand to upgrade from that now outdated 3.4 ghz piece of crap you've somehow been putting up with.

    Not trying to troll, just pointing out the extremely narrow audience this chip would appeal to given that they are moving on to a different core soon. I'm just hoping this will drive down costs of the 'lower end' dual core chips soon.
    • pointing out the extremely narrow audience this chip would appeal to given that they are moving on to a different core soon.

      Corvettes also sell to an extremely narrow audience. However, having the Corvette in the lineup sells a lot more Chevy econo boxes in the process from people pretending that their Impala is a close cousin and next best thing to a Vette.

    • It doesn't mean anything right now.

      In three years, this thing will cost $200, or maybe less. Then the specs will mean something to Joe average consumer, when he's cross shopping it against whichever AMD chip is in that price range.

      And the buyer can rest assured that when he's tackling those intense home computing tasks like tabbed browsing and turbo-tax, system responses will be nearly instantaneous.
  • Ironic (Score:4, Funny)

    by Ctrl+Alt+De1337 ( 837964 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:17PM (#14974214) Homepage
    Ironic that a site reviewing a P4 Extreme Edition is called "Hot Hardware." Hot, indeed.
    • Re:Ironic (Score:2, Informative)

      by jonesy16 ( 595988 )
      What's not ironic is that an anti Intel post was made without reading the FA. The AMD processors actually put out more heat than this processor when idle (which is most of the time for most computer users). Intel has made progress with their 65 nm design in reducing heat and power consumption.
      • Not THAT much. You can eye the power consumtion results and know that Hot Hardware did not enable Cool 'n Quiet. Otherwise, there should have been a 50-60w difference between idle and load.

        The Intel chip, on the other hand, has Enhanced Speedstep enabled. You can tell this by the fact that they mention the prcessor's voltage is from 1.2v to 1.35v. With Speedstep, the processor at idle goes to 2.8 GHz at 1.2v. AMD's Cool 'n Quiet is even more drastic, dropping the processor speed to 1 GHz at 1.1v.

        The fa
  • by EconolineCrush ( 659729 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:18PM (#14974232)
    Also reviewed at The Tech Report [], with more extensive testing against a wider range of processors.
  • "965?" (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by Guppy06 ( 410832 )
    Is that the number of amps it pulls down or the number of watts in heat it puts out?
    • Is that the number of Special Effects used in their marketing campaign?

      Seriously, I know you're just trying to be funny, but both processor companies are known for giving their processors ridiculous arbitrary names.
  • When I upgrade my Intel box, it's going to have an Obscene Edition 666 chip in it that will blow away the competition. There's really no faster processor for hosting porn or bad language.

    The "Breen Edition" is perfect for those who like super cooling of their computer.
  • Questions (Score:5, Interesting)

    by zymano ( 581466 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:24PM (#14974309)
    Does chip wiring or transistors waste the most heat ?

    I don't understand why there aren't any attempts made to move away from silicon & copper/aluminum wiring ?

    We have quantum tunneling transistors that work right now ! ransistors&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefo x-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official [] []
    • Does chip wiring or transistors waste the most heat ?

      Good question. It depends on the technology you use, among other things. I'll hazard a guess and say transistors do.

      I don't understand why there aren't any attempts made to move away from silicon & copper/aluminum wiring ?

      There are. That's the point of R&D. But do you want to front the cash to retool a billion+ dollar mfg plant? Neither does Intel.

      We have quantum tunneling transistors that work right now !

      See previous answer.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Question: I know almost nothing about designing ICs. However, look at these two articles about pie-in-the-sky technologies that might someday be practical. Why aren't we using them? Are the designers at AMD and Intel stupid or something?

      Answer: No, you are.

  • by NullProg ( 70833 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @03:25PM (#14974319) Homepage Journal
    New acronym alert:


  • Intel launches new Pentium Super-Hyper-Mega-Extreme edition. Is it really difficult to think up new product names that don't remind me of Mountain Dew?
  • This sounds like the movie mentioned in "Charley's Angels": "Maximum Extreme III".

    "Now, from the makers of the Itanic! The Pentium Maximum Extreme III!"

    Of course, the real question is the color of the cooling fins. It has to have exotic cooling fins, or it won't sell.

  • Will it go faster if I put an "AMD" or a "Honda Type-R" sticker on it? We'll have to start a site called "ChipCops" to go along with []
  • This is probably a dumb question, but who buys these things? I assume that they're not in use in the enterprise or high-end workstation market. Do rich kids really spend $1K on a cpu and $500 on a graphics card? I would have thought they blew their monthly allowance on stickers for their "R" series rice rocket.

    I have to assume that EE's are extremely limited in quanity and released for marketing purposes. Ping me if that's untrue.

  • Anyone who follows processor clock speeds will be aware that they suddenly stopped increasing a few years ago. While this is technically not a failure of Moore's law, at a minimum it does reflect some kind of failure to keep up with previous levels of progress. Certainly a few years ago the suggestion that we would still not have 4 GHz processors in 2006 would have been laughable, based on extrapolating previous trends.

    Does anyone have any guesses on when we will finally see commercial 4 GHz processors? Wil
    • Anyone who follows processor clock speeds will be aware that they suddenly stopped increasing a few years ago. While this is technically not a failure of Moore's law, at a minimum it does reflect some kind of failure to keep up with previous levels of progress.

      Not really. Moore was commenting on the number of transistors and performance. Clock rate is a convenient but imperfect estimation of performance. If you use some metric that involves an actual measurement of work performed, say specmark, I'd wage
  • by Bullfish ( 858648 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2006 @05:33PM (#14975696)
    I think by now most of us on these kinds of discussion boards know that the price differential between the extreme and non-extreme versions of Intel chips is not worth the extra punch that the cache increase extreme denotes. Unfortunately, they will sell a lot of these to people who don't know any better. Some of them will be to people we know who will then wonder why our cheaper machines perform the same or better. Others will remain convinced that they bought the best and will lash themselves to believing they were not duped.

    To me, this is indicative of a lot of the market now. Really, you don't need a 700 dollar video card to play any game out on the market. True, with the more expensive card you will get better resolutions on very large or multiple monitors, but most people don't have them. I know people whole have 17 inch monitors who were almost suckered by the hype that you need a high priced card just to play FEAR at all. Ditto, BF2. This really has been driven by the hardware companies and hardware sites that like to torture test hardware. Not in and of itself a bad thing, but to the uninitiated, it can be misleading. Especially when coupled with hardware companies that implicitly promote this untruth.

    Unfortunately, the extreme edition etc, is symbolic of companies that feel a loss because their profit slipped from the previous year, in spite of the fact they are still making good money. No doubt some of these execs still sleep at night dreaming of another Y2K scam to rake in the dollars from sales of hardware most people don't need, or in the end, even want.

    That is what I believe is at the root of this kind of marketing. And I don't see it going away, I see it becoming more rife.
  • For the first time ever my home desktop PC turned a year old without being totally obsolete. No, 3.2 GHz is not the fastest, but it's not like a 6.4 GHz machine is available today eitehr. 10 or 15 years ago it was no uncommon to see your machine be trumped by one that ran at least twice as fast a year later. Thank, Intel!
  • Pentium Extrem Edition packs all that matter into a such a small space, and makes sure that the whole thing runs so hot, that it is now capable of starting new Universes right on the tops of our desks. BANG.

Life in the state of nature is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short. - Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan