Tejas canned?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Yousuf Khan
  • Start date Start date
Suggests that the followon generation to the Prescott Pentium 4 is no longer
following on. There might already be an AMD64-capable Pentium M ready to
take its place.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15749
Click to expand...


Well, I hope Intel will deliver x86-64 dual core Pentium M based CPUs
for the desktop first and then a IA64 capable one later on.
They should give customers the ability to choose which 64bit
architecture they want since Microsoft it's supporting both and if the
IA64 one will deliver better performance customers could decide which
64bit ISA will be successfull in the desktop market.
 
Well, I hope Intel will deliver x86-64 dual core Pentium M based CPUs
for the desktop first and then a IA64 capable one later on.
Click to expand...

Why bother?
They should give customers the ability to choose which 64bit
architecture they want since Microsoft it's supporting both and if the
IA64 one will deliver better performance customers could decide which
64bit ISA will be successfull in the desktop market.
Click to expand...

Like there's any doubt?
 
Well, I hope Intel will deliver x86-64 dual core Pentium M based CPUs
for the desktop first and then a IA64 capable one later on.
They should give customers the ability to choose which 64bit
architecture they want since Microsoft it's supporting both and if the
IA64 one will deliver better performance customers could decide which
64bit ISA will be successfull in the desktop market.
Click to expand...

Your phrasing is very confusing. Would you mind explaining more clearly
what you hope will happen? For examples, "will deliver x86-64 dual core
Pentium M first and then a IA64 capable one later on". First and one
are unclear. Are you hoping dual core comes to x86 before Itanium? It
looks like the first dual core from intel will now be Montecito, an
Itanium, if the Inquirer stories are correct. Are you hoping that
Pentium M is shipped as a x86-64 part and then as an Itanium? That
won't happen. It will only be x86 forever. Are you hoping intel delays
Itanium to give x86 a fair chance and let the market decide which it
wants? It won't matter which is first, since the market will decide
anyway. And it's not a direct competition between Pentium M and
Itanium. Different markets.

Alex
 
Yousuf said:
Suggests that the followon generation to the Prescott Pentium 4 is no longer
following on. There might already be an AMD64-capable Pentium M ready to
take its place.
Click to expand...

This all shoulda happened a long time ago. I guess somebody at Intel
just couldn't admit that the P4 was a mistake.
 
Well, I hope Intel will deliver x86-64 dual core Pentium M based CPUs
for the desktop first and then a IA64 capable one later on.
They should give customers the ability to choose which 64bit
architecture they want since Microsoft it's supporting both and if the
IA64 one will deliver better performance customers could decide which
64bit ISA will be successfull in the desktop market.
Click to expand...

This possibility is not even a starter. The Pentium-M is an x86 chip,
through and through. You can't just add IA-64 to this architecture, it's a
major rewiring job. But you can certainly add AMD64 to it, without a sweat.

Yousuf Khan
 
Mike Smith said:
This all shoulda happened a long time ago. I guess somebody at Intel
just couldn't admit that the P4 was a mistake.
Click to expand...

I wonder if I can get a refund on that crappy 2.8E (Prescott) I bought (or
at least
a Northwood replacement?).

Tony
 
tony said:
I wonder if I can get a refund on that crappy 2.8E (Prescott) I bought (or
at least
a Northwood replacement?).
Click to expand...

I -almost- waited for prescott to come out but couldn't so bought a 2.8C for
my video editing machine, glad for once I didn't wait!
 
Yousuf Khan said:
Suggests that the followon generation to the Prescott Pentium 4 is no longer
following on. There might already be an AMD64-capable Pentium M ready to
take its place.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15749

Yousuf Khan
Click to expand...

Presscott is a lame duck, 4Ghz tops, intel though the solution was just
throwing more stages down and pushing the MHZ, I guess someone forgot the
laws of physics.
 
Mike Harrison said:
Presscott is a lame duck, 4Ghz tops, intel though the solution was
just throwing more stages down and pushing the MHZ, I guess someone
forgot the laws of physics.
Click to expand...

Actually I have my doubts that they'll even get it to 4Ghz, it's taking
heroic effort to get it to 3.4Ghz. Time will only tell, I guess.

Yousuf Khan
 
I wonder if I can get a refund on that crappy 2.8E (Prescott) I bought (or
at least
a Northwood replacement?).

Tony
Click to expand...
I've been reading some very impressive OC number's on this cpu..which batch?
 
Yousuf Khan said:
Actually I have my doubts that they'll even get it to 4Ghz, it's taking
heroic effort to get it to 3.4Ghz. Time will only tell, I guess.

Yousuf Khan
Click to expand...

Amazing, how did they spend so much time on developing 90nm prescott without
figuring out the possibility of leakage.
 
Amazing, how did they spend so much time on developing 90nm prescott without
figuring out the possibility of leakage.
Click to expand...

perhaps the foundry guys kept telling the architects that they'd solve the
leakage issues in plenty of time to ship? ;-)
 
perhaps the foundry guys kept telling the architects that they'd solve the
leakage issues in plenty of time to ship? ;-)
Click to expand...

Perhaps the architects were sleeping during that lecture. ;-)
 
daytripper said:
perhaps the foundry guys kept telling the architects that they'd solve the
leakage issues in plenty of time to ship? ;-)
Click to expand...

Fdry> Houston, we have a problem.

Mgt> So what else is new? Fix it.

Fdry> You don't understand. We've got a really big problem.

Mgt> What's to understand? Get back to us when your problem is fixed.

Fdry> We don't know how to fix it.

Mgt> Wrong answer. You're paid to know how to fix things. Get back to
us when you've done your job.

Fdry> Mumble.

Mgt> So have you the product ready? We've got the press releases all
written and the ad budget all made up, so we're ready to go.

Fdry> NO, we don't have a product ready.

Mgt> Well, why not?

Fdry> We have problem.

Mgt> How long will it take you to fix it?

Fdry> We don't know how to fix it.

Mgt> That's not what I asked. I asked you how long it would take to
fix it.

Fdry> Ummm. Ninety days.

Mgt> That's better. You've got ninety days. Good thing for you we're
so understanding.

Fdry> Mumble.

Mgt> So, you have that problem fixed yet?

Fdry> We're working on it.

Mgt> You said that ninety days ago. We can't ever count on you guys not
to screw up, can we? Good thing we've got some really sharp marketing
people and don't have to rely on you losers.


RM
 
rmyers1400 said:
Fdry> Houston, we have a problem.

Mgt> So what else is new? Fix it.

Fdry> You don't understand. We've got a really big problem.

Mgt> What's to understand? Get back to us when your problem is fixed.

Fdry> We don't know how to fix it.

Mgt> Wrong answer. You're paid to know how to fix things. Get back to
us when you've done your job.

Fdry> Mumble.

Mgt> So have you the product ready? We've got the press releases all
written and the ad budget all made up, so we're ready to go.

Fdry> NO, we don't have a product ready.

Mgt> Well, why not?

Fdry> We have problem.

Mgt> How long will it take you to fix it?

Fdry> We don't know how to fix it.

Mgt> That's not what I asked. I asked you how long it would take to
fix it.

Fdry> Ummm. Ninety days.

Mgt> That's better. You've got ninety days. Good thing for you we're
so understanding.

Fdry> Mumble.

Mgt> So, you have that problem fixed yet?

Fdry> We're working on it.

Mgt> You said that ninety days ago. We can't ever count on you guys not
to screw up, can we? Good thing we've got some really sharp marketing
people and don't have to rely on you losers.
Click to expand...

Fdry> define "working", once again?
 
Fdry> Houston, we have a problem.

Mgt> So what else is new? Fix it.

Fdry> You don't understand. We've got a really big problem.

Mgt> What's to understand? Get back to us when your problem is fixed.

Fdry> We don't know how to fix it.

Mgt> Wrong answer. You're paid to know how to fix things. Get back to
us when you've done your job.

Fdry> Mumble.

Mgt> So have you the product ready? We've got the press releases all
written and the ad budget all made up, so we're ready to go.

Fdry> NO, we don't have a product ready.

Mgt> Well, why not?

Fdry> We have problem.

Mgt> How long will it take you to fix it?

Fdry> We don't know how to fix it.

Mgt> That's not what I asked. I asked you how long it would take to
fix it.

Fdry> Ummm. Ninety days.

Mgt> That's better. You've got ninety days. Good thing for you we're
so understanding.

Fdry> Mumble.

Mgt> So, you have that problem fixed yet?

Fdry> We're working on it.

Mgt> You said that ninety days ago. We can't ever count on you guys not
to screw up, can we? Good thing we've got some really sharp marketing
people and don't have to rely on you losers.
Click to expand...

lol

wait - that better not be privileged information - I could get in huge trouble
if there's an NDA involved ;-)

/daytripper (not speaking for...um....anyone ;-)
 
Mike Harrison said:
Presscott is a lame duck, 4Ghz tops, intel though the solution was just
throwing more stages down and pushing the MHZ, I guess someone forgot the
laws of physics.
Click to expand...

Hardly. It's nothing but physics. It seems that something went awry,
but that sometimes happens when you're on the bleeding edge and
implementing new technologies (e.g. strained silicon) at the same time
you're doing a new, smaller process.
 
justin credible said:
I've been reading some very impressive OC number's on this cpu..which
Click to expand...
batch?

Can't help you there. I don't consider OCing ability a feature, as I don't
do that. Low
heat output is a criteria for me, the goal being a fanless PC. Intel desktop
processor design
doesn't agree with my own criteria: overly vented cases (especially silly
side vents) required
by high-heat components, for example, make for noisy PCs. My goal is SILENT
PC, and with
Intel processors it's tough to get even a QUIET PC. To be fair, AMD is no
better. The good
piece and good engineering PC standard doesn't appear to be available! So
much for the
theory of capitalism producing what consumers (this consumer) wants/has
always wanted.

Tony
 
Back
Top