Um Hayes, they are doing that.
reference: Merom, Conroe, Woodcrest
64bit 65nm chips due in the middle of '06, 14 stage pipelines, 2-3Ghz
clocks, 4-issue dispatch! (A64s are 3 issue, G5s are 3+branch, P4's
are 2-issue)
Pentium M is P3 derived, and lacks the 64bitness, rather that futz
around giving it a 64bit overhaul, they're designing something based
on a similar philosophy from the ground up..
On 1 Dec 2005, at 18:50:280, Hayes Elkins wrote:
It's very clear that intel has abandoned trying to get better
performance per mhz out of each core for both the desktop and
server - and instead trying to max out the supporting cast of
interconnects, busses, and other I/O. The new Xeon's that intel is
touting are nothing more than shrunken cores of the same lame ass
P4 cores from almost 2 years ago.
What is very puzzling is that their Pentium M (a hybrid of the PIII
and IV) is their fastest per mhz CPU - ever. Even faster than an FX
in a few cases. Why they dont switch back to a shorter pipeline
design for their mainstream CPU's now that the fab's are available
to crank out the mhz?
The mhz race is about to come dangerously close when AMD puts out a
true 3Ghz CPU. Which of course just OBLITERATES any intel offering.
From: CW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: The Hardware List <hardware@hardwaregroup.com>
To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com
Subject: [H] -LO- CNet does a test workout: Dual Core AMD vs. Dual
Core Intel
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:43:06 -0600
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-9.html?tag=btn
Interesting. The ref would have stopped the fight in the real world.
-_-_
James Boswell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx
MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
