What's the story with Prescott?

[wgd]

I'm getting confused. I thought Intel was going to discontinue the
Prescott line and switch to dual-core processors based on their mobile
chips. Good idea for general desktop use, but it sounds like a loser for
gamers and DVD authors. FPS games (UT2004) and video encoding to DVD
compliant MPEG2 currently work best with a single (very fast) processor.

But, Intel just announced new processors based on the Prescott
architecture, although in a new socket package. I thought they were
giving up on Prescott due to a number of problems, including the power
draw of the chips. So what's going on?

 

[GSV Three Minds in a Can]

I'm getting confused. I thought Intel was going to discontinue the
Prescott line and switch to dual-core processors based on their mobile
chips. Good idea for general desktop use, but it sounds like a loser for
gamers and DVD authors. FPS games (UT2004) and video encoding to DVD
compliant MPEG2 currently work best with a single (very fast) processor.

But, Intel just announced new processors based on the Prescott
architecture, although in a new socket package. I thought they were
giving up on Prescott due to a number of problems, including the power
draw of the chips. So what's going on?

You are confusing strategy and tactics. The strategy seems to be to go
with developments of the processor that does most work per unit of
energy (the mobiles), even though their clock speed doesn't look so good
in the marketing glossies.

Meantime the short term tactic remains (as it is for everyone) "sell
what you've already got in the pipeline". There is rather a lot of WIP
(Work in Progress) in most design shops .. stuff in stages all the way
from 'think tank' to the 'release to production'.

There are a few things that really do work best with one fast CPU,
however there are plenty more that would benefit from a proper dualie
(which is why professional workstations - yea, even those video editing
ones - are more likely to have dual (or quad) CPUs than one boasting an
amazing RPM number). Hyper Threading doesn't really count (but hey. it
was cheapish to implement, and gives the marketing folks something else
to ballyhoo about .. along with '3.x Ghz', and (just to show no
favouritism) '64 bit').

 

[George Macdonald]

I'm getting confused. I thought Intel was going to discontinue the
Prescott line and switch to dual-core processors based on their mobile
chips.

There was a thread here which went along those lines but I was never sure
it got to the truth of the matter and then it drifted somewhat. Intel has
never said at any point that it is discontinuing Prescott or even the P4
architecture; what they did say was that they had cancelled work on next
generation processors for desktops and servers based on the P4 core. As
noted here,
http://www.reed-electronics.com/electronicnews/article/CA415984?text=prescott
the official line is that "The company changed its plans because it would
be bombarding OEMs with too many products within too short a timeframe,
according to the accelerated roadmap." The suggestion is that the Tejas
and Jayhawk would be followed too soon by the dual cores based on an
accelerated schedule for the last.

Good idea for general desktop use, but it sounds like a loser for
gamers and DVD authors. FPS games (UT2004) and video encoding to DVD
compliant MPEG2 currently work best with a single (very fast) processor.

But, Intel just announced new processors based on the Prescott
architecture, although in a new socket package. I thought they were
giving up on Prescott due to a number of problems, including the power
draw of the chips. So what's going on?

In the same artcle, Intel "will release dual core processors all the way up
and down its product line, from its 64-bit Itanium server processor down to
its mobile processors." There's no suggestion anywhere that the P4 core is
dead or that they were "giving up". Many people have assumed that the dual
core x86 CPUs will be based on the Pentium M series but Intel has never
said that AFAIK - it may be true but it's speculation.

As for what happens between now and the dual cores in 3/4Q 2005, it would
seem that Intel will tune the P4 process to get better speed grades... I'd
guess up to ~4.5GHz, or so maybe higher(?), before the dual cores arrive.
Once again, though, they have fallen behind AMD in desktop performance with
the announcement last week of the 3800+ AMD64 CPUs - the emperor's clothes
are looking umm, kinda threadbare.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

 

[Tony Hill]

I'm getting confused. I thought Intel was going to discontinue the
Prescott line and switch to dual-core processors based on their mobile
chips.

Intel has made no announcements of the sort, despite the rumors that
have been flying around. What they have done is canceled Tejas (the
follow-up to Prescott that apparently had a LOT of problems) and they
are planning on going to a dual-core solution for the future.

Intel has not really released many details about their future
dual-core desktop chip. There are definitely plans to create a
dual-core version of the Pentium-M for laptops, but Intel's real
next-generation desktop processor is still somewhat of a mystery.

Ohh, and FWIW these plans are for the chip to arrive sometime in 2006
or 2007.

Good idea for general desktop use, but it sounds like a loser for
gamers and DVD authors. FPS games (UT2004) and video encoding to DVD
compliant MPEG2 currently work best with a single (very fast) processor.

Video encoding is an application that could, at least theoretically,
run very well on a dual-core setup assuming that both cores had
sufficient memory bandwidth. The trick here is all in software, but
there's nothing about the tasks that makes this too difficult to do.

Games are somewhat harder to make effectively multithreaded, there
have been some attempts in the past and they haven't been all that
successful for the most part. Certainly you can fairly easily split
out the AI, sound and video into three different threads without too
much difficulty, but in most FPS games it's almost all video anyway.

But, Intel just announced new processors based on the Prescott
architecture, although in a new socket package.

Yup, this has been the plan for some time and no changes have been
announced in that regard. Intel will continue building Prescott-based
chips for at least another 2-3 years.

I thought they were
giving up on Prescott due to a number of problems, including the power
draw of the chips. So what's going on?

The "problems" are greatly exaggerated among tech groups and websites.
For the most part the Prescott is working just fine for Intel. It was
rather late to get to market and Intel (like IBM, TSMC and just about
every other company) has had some trouble getting their 90nm
manufacturing process up to speed, but otherwise the chip is doing
it's job.