Pentium 4 desktop speeds in graphics

[Steven]

Pentium 4 desktop speeds in graphics

A nearer futurology than our other Intel story

By Mike Magee: Wednesday 29 January 2003, 15:54

AS WE SAID at the end of last year, it will be more difficult to choose the right Pentium 4 desktop chip in 2003 than ever before.

Some of this futurology but not a futurology as far ahead as 65 nano processes and 10GHz chips. (See separate story today).

Life will be complicated this year because of the introduction not only of 800MHz system buses, but also the enabling of hyperthreading in processors 2.4GHz and above - while Intel will still be selling desktop CPUs that are not hyperthreaded.

The following diagram shows just how complicated it can get, whether you're a system builder, a consumer, or a PC designer.

By Q4 Intel will be ready to start making the Prescott 90 nanometer which will have 1MB cache and an 800MHz front side bus. By Q1 of 2004, Intel thinks it can up that to 3.60GHz.

In Q4 and Q1 of next year, therefore, there will be some overlapping between the current, Northwood core, and the Prescott core, which includes CSA (communications streaming architecture).

Intel will differentiate hyperthreaded and non hyperthreaded processors up until then by charging additional sums of money for the 800MHz Springdale/Canterwood enabled chipset CPUs, and others which support 533MHz front side buses. The 400MHz front side bus disappears gradually throughout this year, except for the Celerons.

Intel claims three of its fabs will start producing 90 nanometer (Prescott) style chips during 2003, but as the first Prescotts won't be available until the very end of this year, we'd suspect that the initial quantities of such chips won't be massive. And it all presumes that yields, processes and the like will all go swimmingly.

And talking about the Celerons. By Q4 of this year, they will reach 2.50GHz, and Intel promises speeds of 2.50GHz+ by this quarter next year.

And, as we've pointed out elsewhere, Intel will also position them as desktop chips. ?

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=7486