|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Re: Dual-Channel+RDRAM! (Reply to this comment)
by vicwang
"the RDRAM modules must be installed in pairs for the P4 platform... (which also means that 128MB of RDRAM in P4 systems is really just two 64MB modules).
Good point, and you're definitely right that it's worth mentioning to any prospective P4 buyer. Not only does that potentially limit future upgrade options (imagine someone with four 64 meg RDRAM modules wanting to upgrade to 512 megs!) but with the reputed unreliability of RDRAM in general, that would seem to introduce even more potential for problems.
"On the other hand, the 'importance' of this omission... may be undermined by the fact that you just don't recommend the P4 to anyone... yet. And neither do I. It's as revolutionary as the Pentium Pro, but let's wait until the 'Pentium II' revision of the P4 architecture, hmm?"
I'd say that's a pretty apt comparison. Maybe, just like the Pentium Pro, we'll really see the P4 come into form once it's not even called the P4 anymore--for example, a fully re-designed "P4 Pro", using P4 technologies but based on a new design. Of course, the Pentium Pro comparison is interesting since at least the Pentium Pro excelled as a server chip, while the P4 doesn't even have that going for it (no multiprocessor capability, RDRAM not a good choice for servers, etc).
Oh yeah, another thing, did you know that the P4's ALUs are actually clocked at twice the core speed?... Any ideas on why Intel did this?
I did hear about this, but since it doesn't seem to significantly affect real-world performance I didn't mention it in the review. I haven't heard of any specific reasons why they did it, other than for the general goal of a more powerful CPU, but I can't help but think a more powerful FPU or extra L1 cache would have been infinitely more useful than double-clocked ALU's.
Thanks for the comments!
-vicwang
|
Apr 14 '01
12:15 pm PDT
|
|
Re: p4+is+not+that+expensive (Reply to this comment)
by vicwang
"i put together a p4 system for $1000"
Sounds like you got a pretty good deal, since even after the latest P4 price cuts the lowest listing at Pricewatch.com is about $465 for the 1.5 ghz version. The price range listed in my review was accurate at the time, although I'll need to update it since the prices have dropped significantly since then (and are scheduled to drop much further in the next few months due to weak P4 demand).
Of course, even at current prices, the 1.5 ghz P4 is still over twice as expensive as the fastest Athlons, which means I still can't recommend it at this time over cheaper (and in many ways, better) options. If the upcoming price cuts put it closer into the Athlon's pricing range, I'll update the review itself accordingly.
Thanks,
-vicwang
|
Apr 14 '01
11:48 am PDT
|
|
Dual-Channel RDRAM! (Reply to this comment)
by computernut
Very good and thorough epinion as always, vicwang. But I did notice a rather 'important' omission (in my opinion) about the current RAM structure of the P4: dual-channel RDRAM. In other words (as I'm sure you know) the RDRAM modules must be installed in pairs for the P4 platform, which is where the P4 gets its coveted RAM throughput - something Intel hasn't dealt with since original Pentiums and 72-pin SIMMs. You did mention this in your article but didn't make it clear that RDRAM modules need to be paired (which also means that 128MB of RDRAM in P4 systems is really just two 64MB modules).
Since such a large majority of RAM problems that occur with 'commoners' is buying/selecting the wrong RAM type, and since having to buy two RDRAM modules at a time is so expensive, I thought this omission to be 'important' enough to write a comment :) Remember all the problems people used to have with SIMMs? "I have to buy two at a time!?" I always felt so sorry for them!
On the other hand, the 'importance' of this omission (whether by accident or intentional) may be undermined by the fact that you just don't recommend the P4 to anyone... yet. And neither do I. It's as revolutionary as the Pentium Pro, but let's wait until the 'Pentium II' revision of the P4 architecture, hmm?
P.S. - Oh yeah, another thing, did you know that the P4's ALUs are actually clocked at twice the core speed? As in, a P4 at 1.5GHz has 3(?) ALUs operating at 3GHz. I've heard this is nothing new for high-end server procs, but it sure is for consumer procs! The only thing I don't get is why anyone would need/want that much integer performance. Any ideas on why Intel did this?
~ computerNut
|
Apr 11 '01
1:01 pm PDT
|
|
Read Vic's epinion BEFORE you buy a P4; Thanks Vic !!! (Reply to this comment)
by el-tigre
I just had to join the long line of people thanking Vic for a GREAT EPINION. Thanks again!
|
Apr 01 '01
10:57 am PDT
|
|
Unsurpassed review! (Reply to this comment)
by TheDOZ
Excellent, Vic...just excellent. Probably didn't need to be told that, but I thought I'd mention it anyway. The detail is what makes it...and what's more, the detail provided is written in such a way that anyone could understand the technical angle without having pursued a degree in IS/IT.
...I'd say more but I gotta run off and read some more of your stuff...
TheDOZ
|
Mar 23 '01
1:55 pm PST
|
|
I'm impressed (Reply to this comment)
by carlito21
Dude, that was the most comprehensive review I've ever read in epinions. Thanks...
|
Feb 23 '01
1:09 pm PST
|
|
From a layman user... (Reply to this comment)
by ASourdough4
...very well written - Vic does not hesitate to qualify (i.e. degeek) the arcane abbreviations and manages to arrive at a strongly supported conclusion.
On a recent trip to Reno, NV, I noticed that all of the H-P Intel machines were P-4's; many of the competing brands were AMD's. Couldn't help noticing that all of the "Bargain" (i.e. Used/Returned) PC boxes were P-4's.
|
Feb 13 '01
1:11 pm PST
|
|
Hey Vic (Reply to this comment)
by jhejl
Nice review.
Small world -- drop me a line sometime,
Jim
|
Jan 03 '01
5:35 pm PST
|
|
Aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhaaaaaaa! (Reply to this comment)
by tipu
Now that was a vicwanged epinion!
As always, solid info backed up by careful research... you're a model!
About the update: hmmm... I am not sure how much I'm being affected by stereotypes, but I'd think that among the first wave of buyers, quite a significant bunch will be hardcore gamers trying to strain out a 5.8% framerate increased for their latest bashfest. I dunno how Voodoo is doing on the market, but might this revelation sour Voodoo users to the P4 for a while? Hmmm...
... ahhh well, I don't have too much time to ponder that. I do know that you do an excellent job! Keep it up!
Don't have too much time before I'm off for break, but I'll make an effort to return for more... and... (~; viele danke Vic! ...t-žoo
|
Dec 26 '00
12:05 am PST
|
|
I gotta say... (Reply to this comment)
by ldwalker59
that your epinion was so extremely thorough it almost makes me wonder as to how you had time to swing by one of mine and post an HR! For that I thank you, and I wanted to return the favor although there was already 100 some odd HRs on this review already I just made it 100 some odd plus one! heheh!
Great review!
-ldwalker59
|
Dec 19 '00
3:47 pm PST
|
|
Comprehensive review (Reply to this comment)
by Arlo_J
This analysis is clear and will enable most non technical types to understand the relevant differences in arhitecture, and consequently make a decision less influenced by hype.
|
Dec 13 '00
6:30 am PST
|
|
Excellent Review! (Reply to this comment)
by Chalathra
Thanks for posting such a great review!!! (=
~*chalathra*~
|
Dec 12 '00
12:56 pm PST
|
|
Re: Nice Work...Very Thorough (Reply to this comment)
by vicwang
"Wow, can you believe I hadn't even HEARD about the P4 until I happened upon your review? Although I must blush to admit that my subscription to PC WORLD has expired and I've neglected the latest copy of WIRED on my desk, I still can't believe I haven't heard"
Interesting, isn't it? I never thought the day would come when Intel CPU is released without all the Intel "bunny" commercials, Blue Mimes everywhere, commercials about how it'll "speed up the Internet," radio ads, McDonald's promotional tie-ins... OK, maybe not all those things, but I'm sure you get the point :-).
"Thanks, too, for being so thorough and useful in your review...I felt like I was really getting something out of what you wrote...efact in addition to epinion. Danke!"
Thanks for the compliment, unheimlich (as well as everyone else who has commented thus far). It really makes me happy to hear that my work is found helpful and enjoyed by members such as yourself.
By the way, a strange coincidence: to my knowledge, this is only the 2nd time in my life that someone said "Danke" to me... the FIRST time being about one hour ago, by another Epinions member.
-vicwang
|
Dec 01 '00
8:44 am PST
|
|
Re: Great article, P4 bummer and then some! (Reply to this comment)
by vicwang
"Here is a bit more heat for the fire, that you may indeed have left out on purpose, but I will mention them here, just in case someone is still thinking of buying one! (;-))"
Thanks defilm, for such an insightful comment that really sheds some light on the P4 from a different perspective. I wasn't aware of how the OS fits into the scheme of things as far as maximum throughput is concerned, so I definitely learned something there. If I understand you correctly, are you saying that once the hardware bottlenecks are eliminated (or "widened") the OS will start becoming the limiting factor? Or that it already has, at least in some situations?
Anyway, have you given thought to writing a Pentium 4 review also? You've already written more P4 information here than several of the other reviews contain! If so, I'll be the first to check it out.
Thanks,
-vicwang
|
Dec 01 '00
8:32 am PST
|
|
Excellence has been achieved... (Reply to this comment)
by Gr8ful,  in Computer Hardware
Very well written and thought out. It's a pleasure to read a review that has this much effort put into it.
The information in the glossary was an excellent idea to help people who may not understand all the aspects of the review.
Peace,
Gr8ful :-)
|
Dec 01 '00
7:19 am PST
|
|
Nice Work...Very Thorough (Reply to this comment)
by unheimlich
Wow, can you believe I hadn't even HEARD about the P4 until I happened upon your review? Although I must blush to admit that my subscription to PC WORLD has expired and I've neglected the latest copy of WIRED on my desk, I still can't believe I haven't heard. So thanks for giving me the heads up. Thanks, too, for being so thorough and useful in your review...I felt like I was really getting something out of what you wrote...efact in addition to epinion. Danke!
- unheimlich
|
Nov 30 '00
10:53 am PST
|
|
Great article, P4 bummer and then some! (Reply to this comment)
by defilm
Vic,
You have commented on several of my reviews, so I admit I wanted to find out more about you. This epinion is well written and hits the nail on the head. Here is a bit more heat for the fire, that you may indeed have left out on purpose, but I will mention them here, just in case someone is still thinking of buying one! (;-))
Folks, I will try not to get too deep... The process of pipelining, and advanced "look ahead", does two key things. It allows the CPU to execute an instruction, and while it begins that cycle, of perhaps a multi-cycle, instrcution, consistant with CISC processors, it reads ahead in memory and "prepares" other instruction for execution, to a point where it assures that there is no conflict in doing so between the instructions it is preparing, and the one being executed. While this sounds like Graduate level Architecture, I assure you.... it is.(;-) But the key element here is that the process speeds up execution IF and ONLY IF the processor prepared the correct instructions. A branch instruction can cause the entire pipeline cache to be discarded. In this event, there is no gain at all. The bet is that this won't happen often. Parallel processing techniques and optimizing compilers that are used to build the software you run increase the chances of multiple branches due to the way they optimize. So, you may in fact see nearly no gain against a PIII at 800Mhz, or 1Ghz as Vic stated.
Lastly, and perhaps more important, Vic mentioned Performance and Speed. He correctly stated that each one of the components of "the system" will only be a s good as the throughput of the weakest link.
He stuck to hardware and mentioned CPU, RAM (refresh rates, etc),
but often overlooked is the Operating System. Your multi-tasking
operating system has a maximum throughput. This brings in to play
the chipsets for I/O, the CPU and I/O scheduler, and more. This is
true of all operating systems (Windows, Unix, Linux, etc). The windows
kernel can only process on the CPU side before the system will likely become I/O bound. (ie. It processes all the programs instructions, and
hence all threads or processes are awaiting on some form of I/O. This is the new bottleneck area.
This is a cycle. Increase CPU, you wait on Memory. Decrease refresh time (when memory is unavailable), you wait on I/O devices. Build better I/O chipsets, you wait on slower I/O devices. In many cases we are now up against laws of physics for mechanical devices, so these are going solid-state. As we continue to move forward in these areas, we will run up against the maximum throughput of the operating system.
(Current methods of movement.. multi-threaded Operating systems on
multiple processors (hence the Dual/Quad CPU boards you are starting to see). This cycle used to be much longer. Remember when you
upgraded and you had a killer system for 2-3 years? Now it is like
2-3 months??? At some point, we may run in to the "wallet" throughput issue! But this cycle will continue as it has since the 60's.
Thanks Vic for a great P4. review
|
Nov 30 '00
8:45 am PST
|
|
Nice article Vic (Reply to this comment)
by KarsinTheHutt
A very well thought out piece. Personally, I think this iteration of the P4 architecture won't sell many units. The Pentium Pro, like the P4, didn't sell well and performed poorly on applications of the day (P-Pro was optimised for 32-bit applications instead of the 16 bit apps that were prevalent in 1995).
Look for improved versions in the future.
Check out Tom's Hardware too
http://www.tomshardware.com has several articles on the Pentium 4 and some very interesting findings (some good others bad).
|
Nov 30 '00
6:31 am PST
|
|
Great Review. (Reply to this comment)
by game_monkey
This is probably the best review I have read on Epinions. For the last few weeks I have been comparing Dell's P4 1.4 and Gateway's Athlon 1 gig. After reading this review I think I will save the money and buy the Athlon now, and wait and see what happens with the p4.
Thanks for the information, you saved me some cash.
~gm
|
Nov 29 '00
2:27 pm PST
|
|
Great details! (Reply to this comment)
by lsname
I don't know much about computers, but I thought your review was well thought out, and easy for the average person to read.
|
Nov 29 '00
9:26 am PST
|
|
my favorite aspects of the p4 (Reply to this comment)
by Turin
1> until it reaches 1.5ghz it still doesn't outperform the p3. Untill it reaches 1.8 it won't out perform the athlon heh.
2> life cycle: the first 3 months of p4's and motherboards are going to be scrapped. Both processor and motherboard's life cycles will end there as intel revises the chipsets and especially the bridge architectures on them... go intel!
3> by the time the p4 reaches around 2ghz where it is actually outperforming everything else, the p3's die will be shrunk to .15 micron and thus it is projected to reach around 1.5ghz, making it cheaper and allowing it again to outperform the p4.
pluss amd's hammer line will be out by then (or whatever amd is calling it now) and the die on the athlons should be shrunk too.
throw the price of the p4 into the mix, could intel be screwing people over more royally? The sad thing is people will buy the p4 cause the number 4 is bigger than 3 and because it has more hz, and more hz means its better!
|
Nov 29 '00
6:39 am PST
|
|
Strange (Reply to this comment)
by Destinys-Child
You would think with a major release like this that they would advertise, yet all I see are the new PIII commercials with the Blueman Group.
On a side note I saw them performance in Boston and they are great.
Great Review By the Way
Destinys-Child
|
Nov 28 '00
6:07 am PST
|
|
This really is your best review yet. (Reply to this comment)
by Wolf_Knight
Like I said, you did an excellent overall job with this review. In fact, it's one of your greatest writings yet. Adding the glossary to the comments section was a nice added touch. :-)
I don't see what you were so worried about. Your reviews and articles are always high-quality and informative!
|
Nov 28 '00
1:10 am PST
|
|
Good idea to put in the glossary! (Reply to this comment)
by mulan
This is really well written, though I wouldn't have understood 80% of the article if I weren't taking a computer architecture class right now! =)
|
Nov 28 '00
12:28 am PST
|
|
Glossary (Reply to this comment)
by vicwang
Bandwidth: The rate at which data that can be transmitted through a device (RAM, system bus, etc)
DDR (Double Data Rate): A type of SDRAM which provides twice the total throughput. Instead of transmitting data once per clock cycle, it transmits data on the rising and trailing ends of each clock cycle.
FPU (Floating Point Unit): A collection of circuits in a microprocessor that executes floating-point computations (numbers involving decimals, as opposed to whole integers). Important for 3D graphics and other complex calculations.
Front Side Bus: The main system input/output interface that connects the CPU everything else. Determines the speed at which the CPU communicates with RAM, PCI devices, the graphics card, and other peripherals.
Hyperpipelining: The term coined by Intel to describe the deep 20-stage pipeline of the Pentium 4. Not a technical term.
Instruction : The tasks a CPU must perform at the most basic level. It is a statement that indicates an operation for the computer to perform and any data to be used in performing the operation
MHZ (Megahertz): The number of "cycles per second" that the processor runs at. Also known as the "frequency" or "speed" of the processor, and roughly indicative of a processor's performance.
MMX: A set of new instructions, introduced with the Pentium MMX CPU, designed to accelerate multi-media performance (e.g. audio processing, video playback). Performance benefits were somewhat disappointing since MMX did nothing to aid 3D graphics (MMX could not be used simultaneously with the FPU). Also unoficially referred to as "multi-media extensions."
MPEG Encoding: The process of converting a video signal into an "MPEG" file, which significantly reduces the size of the file. Extremely FPU and processor intensive.
Pentium Pro: A 32-bit CPU released by Intel in 1995, originally designed for servers. The "core" of the Pentium Pro architecture was later used in the Pentium II and Pentium III.
Performance: A general term used to describe the amount of "work" that can be done by a CPU in a given period of time. Although "MHZ" has often been used synonymously with performance, better indicators of performance include benchmarks (both real-world and synthetic), MIPS (millions of instructions per second), and FLOPS (floating point operations per second).
Rambus: Company which developed the RDRAM technology, and currently collects royalties on each RDRAM chip sold.
RDRAM (Rambus Dynamic Random Access Memory): A proprietary memory technology controlled by Rambus which offers greater memory bandwidth than conventional SDRAM, although at greater cost and slower latencies.
Real-World Benchmarks: Applications such as actual 3D games, Microsoft Office applications, Photoshop, AutoCAD, etc. which can be used to test the performance of computer hardware. For example, games such as Unreal Tournament and Quake III allow the user to calculate the average frames-per-second while playing the game, thus providing a measure of "real-world performance."
SDRAM (Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory): The most common type of memory (RAM) in most systems, usually running at 100 or 133 mhz.
SSE (Streaming Single-Instruction Multiple-Data Extensions): Originally expected to be called "MMX2," SSE extended the MMX instruction set by including instructions designed for 3D graphics. Originally available in only the PIII, it is now available in all PIII and Celeron CPU's, and will be available in AMD's "Hammer" processors in late 2001.
Synthetic Benchmarks: Software designed specifically to test the performance of a computer's hardware.
3DNow!: 21 new instructions, introduced with the AMD K6-2 CPU, that can speed up 3D graphics and other tasks. Included in all current CPU's, while the Athlon and Duron contain additional 3DNow! instructions
3D Rendering: The realistic drawing of three-dimensional objects (or animation) using computer technology. An example would be the calculations used in creating the movie Toy Story.
Throughput: Generally synonymous with "Bandwidth"
|
Nov 28 '00
12:25 am PST
|
|
|
|
© 1999-2008 Shopping.com, Inc.