My How Times have Changed

[Cowboy X]

Just have a look at this article :

http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5172938.html?tag=nefd_top

I just knew it was coming from the time that Intel released the Centrino and enabled hyperthreading on the P4.

 

[Sophisticated]

Intresting

 

[Vio1]

cool... i wonder what it will be... the article only said that intel will change the way they label there cpus but didnt give a definite example.

 

[dead_man311]

that is very intresting, will be intresting to see what they do.

 

[Hagakure]

I wonder if normal consumers will finely start to see that AMD and Intel really aren’t so far apart, except in price.

 

[dead_man311]

I wonder if normal consumers will finely start to see that AMD and Intel really aren’t so far apart, except in price.

same thing i was talking to my GF about erlyer when i read this artical

 

[rudnik68]

So lets take an informal poll. If you have a Northwood 3.2GHz and a Prescott 3.2GHz, which should get the higher PR rating? Which processor do you think Intel will give the higher rating to? And since Intel is going to a non-cycle per second based chip rating, do you think this damages the marketing advantage that was inherent to the hicgh clock speed Netburst architecture?

Personally, for better or worse, I think Intel will give a Prescott 3.2GHz a higher performance rating than a Northwood 3.2GHz. I don't think this is right - benchmarks prove that in a majority applications, a 3.2GHz northwood is faster than a 3.2 GHz Prescott. However, I don't think benchmarks can make Intel advertise that its newest chip is slower than an older chip.

 

[]-[itman]

So lets take an informal poll. If you have a Northwood 3.2GHz and a Prescott 3.2GHz, which should get the higher PR rating? Which processor do you think Intel will give the higher rating to? And since Intel is going to a non-cycle per second based chip rating, do you think this damages the marketing advantage that was inherent to the hicgh clock speed Netburst architecture?

Personally, for better or worse, I think Intel will give a Prescott 3.2GHz a higher performance rating than a Northwood 3.2GHz. I don't think this is right - benchmarks prove that in a majority applications, a 3.2GHz northwood is faster than a 3.2 GHz Prescott. However, I don't think benchmarks can make Intel advertise that its newest chip is slower than an older chip.

They could just give them both the same pr rating and save the higher ones for the higher clocked Prescott's.

 

[rudnik68]

They could just give them both the same pr rating and save the higher ones for the higher clocked Prescott's.

Than whats the point of using a pr rating? Intel is giving them the same rating now - where is the change?

 

[Yuriman]

Lol, I can just imagine intel coming out with their new 4ghz processor, and calling it the Pentium4 2400+, faster than a 2.4ghz amd!!

 

[matrixzen]

Something interesting. It seems like intel likes AMD's marketing strategy.

 

[Maxvla]

perhaps this is a precursor to intel making more work/cycle and alleviating part of the massive heat problem. they want to get everyone accustomed to model numbers again before they start lowering the mhz again.

interesting..

 

[Yuriman]

Hmm, well, when both intel and amd have 3ghz processors that do MUCH more work per cycles, will they both call the processor the 4500+ or something? Or will they suddenly drop it?

 

[west1]

hmmmm...

 

[Gnufsh]

I don't believe Intel is going to a PR system, more of just a model number system (just a little different): http://anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1994

 

[Cowboy X]

This model number system reminds me an awfull lot of the Opteron naming scheme (in theory ) .

 

[]-[itman]

Than whats the point of using a pr rating? Intel is giving them the same rating now - where is the change?

To differentiate between the Pentium-M processor, the Celeron, the regular P4's, and the P4EE's.

Intel really is doing this because I'm sure the Centrino laptops aren't being accepted as well as they'd like because of the lower clock speed of the processor and Celeron processors are probably eating into too much of P4 sales because of their overated clock speed. Intel wants people to know that there is a performance difference at different clockspeeds. For Intel, this is mainly to differentiate between their own line of products, right now it's a pretty complex lineup for the average joe. AMD did the pr rating to combat Intel's high clock speed, low IPC approach.

 

[Cowboy X]

Don't forget the water is also now muddied further by Prescotts and P4 processors which don't have hyperthreading . How do you Pr that , I just can't wait to see .

 

[Captain Newbie]

Methinks we're going to see a LOT more confusion in the Intel camp.

However, on the right side of the river....business as usual for now

 

[Cowboy X]

Here is a funny post by the inquirer :

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=14670