stix_kua
11-03-2003, 03:22 PM
I'm really looking forward to see how it performs against AMDs...hopefully it explodes from the high heat it generates (spontaneous combustion)
Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : Intel Releases P4 Extreme Edition
killer_teddy
11-03-2003, 03:41 PM
The P4 Extreme Edition sells for $925 in 1,000 unit quantities.
Seriously?:rolleyes:
I'd rather have a whole new rig and with that money I could!
Seriously?:rolleyes:
I'd rather have a whole new rig and with that money I could!
Tony Denali
11-03-2003, 05:03 PM
The P4 Extreme Edition sells for $925 in 1,000 unit quantities.
Ouch, how much is it for just one!...lol
Ouch, how much is it for just one!...lol
ATI RADEON 8500
11-03-2003, 05:12 PM
Approx $1,200 sounds right... :rolleyes:
tasty danish
11-03-2003, 10:43 PM
i just got done building my new 2.4c based rig, and the whole rig cost me 1200, this is a bunch of poo
CrazyCrusher
11-03-2003, 10:46 PM
that just nuts for some thing like that, as said above i would rather build me a new rig, or just buy AMD's 64Bit for a lil more.
iceblue
11-04-2003, 12:40 AM
well it's an extreme processor so it's gotta have an extreme price to go with it :D
..but it is new so i'm not surprised it costs so much.
..but it is new so i'm not surprised it costs so much.
tasty danish
11-04-2003, 01:05 AM
Originally posted by CrazyCrusher
that just nuts for some thing like that, as said above i would rather build me a new rig, or just buy AMD's 64Bit for a lil more.
istn the amd a couple hundred less?
that just nuts for some thing like that, as said above i would rather build me a new rig, or just buy AMD's 64Bit for a lil more.
istn the amd a couple hundred less?
patrickparong
11-04-2003, 01:43 AM
I may build a rig with that processor after 5 years. For now, I would settle for P4 2.4 with MSI mobo.:D
Tony Denali
11-04-2003, 01:51 AM
Im going to have to see some benchmarks that will justify that price. I mean, come on....3 times as much as a regular 3.2C? If they cant walk the walk with the benchmarks, then your going to see prices on that thing drop tremendously fast.
But, then again, ive seen benchmarks that have the 3.2c beating the athlon 64 in most tasks except for gaming. If this is the case and Intel steps up to the plate with that much better of a gaming app............
Should be interesting!
But, then again, ive seen benchmarks that have the 3.2c beating the athlon 64 in most tasks except for gaming. If this is the case and Intel steps up to the plate with that much better of a gaming app............
Should be interesting!
rraehal
11-04-2003, 01:52 AM
I hope this release drives down the cost of the P4C proccessors. I still am not running HyperThreading, but having a Proc with SSE2 has noticably imporved some of my graphics apps. (the whole reason I got a P4.)
Soon I will jump the 2 GHz range with a 3.0.
Soon I will jump the 2 GHz range with a 3.0.
bassman
11-04-2003, 06:02 AM
Originally posted by ATI RADEON 8500
Approx $1,200 sounds right... :rolleyes:
Precisely, shop price will be quite too high...:rolleyes:
Approx $1,200 sounds right... :rolleyes:
Precisely, shop price will be quite too high...:rolleyes:
killer_teddy
11-04-2003, 07:08 AM
Originally posted by tasty danish
istn the amd a couple hundred less?
Yup: http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproduct.asp?description=19-103-416&DEPA=1
istn the amd a couple hundred less?
Yup: http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproduct.asp?description=19-103-416&DEPA=1
CrazyCrusher
11-04-2003, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by CrazyCrusher
that just nuts for some thing like that, as said above i would rather build me a new rig, or just buy AMD's 64Bit for a lil more.
ops a little less I should have said :)
that just nuts for some thing like that, as said above i would rather build me a new rig, or just buy AMD's 64Bit for a lil more.
ops a little less I should have said :)
Logan2002
11-04-2003, 05:21 PM
That price is crazy.
I too could build quite an impressive system for 1200 bucks.
With that bud. I could get a really nice AMD cpu and splurge on a nice vid card, with alot of ram.
:t
I too could build quite an impressive system for 1200 bucks.
With that bud. I could get a really nice AMD cpu and splurge on a nice vid card, with alot of ram.
:t
Strawbs
11-04-2003, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by Tony Denali
But, then again, ive seen benchmarks that have the 3.2c beating the athlon 64 in most tasks except for gaming. If this is the case and Intel steps up to the plate with that much better of a gaming app............
Should be interesting! But the Athlon64 is primarily a 64bit chip! It's not meant to be compared to 32bit chips because it only runs 32bit as a courtesy ...and it does so pretty well IMO.
$1200 ...Daang! they're making ppl pay for that L3 cache.
:t
But, then again, ive seen benchmarks that have the 3.2c beating the athlon 64 in most tasks except for gaming. If this is the case and Intel steps up to the plate with that much better of a gaming app............
Should be interesting! But the Athlon64 is primarily a 64bit chip! It's not meant to be compared to 32bit chips because it only runs 32bit as a courtesy ...and it does so pretty well IMO.
$1200 ...Daang! they're making ppl pay for that L3 cache.
:t
ATI RADEON 8500
11-04-2003, 07:21 PM
Wonder if anybody acutally going to buy that ****?:eek:
killer_teddy
11-04-2003, 07:28 PM
Of course someone will buy it. Some rich git with more money than sense will buy anything with Extreme in the name and a few gimmicks.
What I'm curious for is benchmarks, anyone seen any yet?
What I'm curious for is benchmarks, anyone seen any yet?
iceblue
11-04-2003, 07:41 PM
some people just cant take a little humor? :rolleyes:
Someone Stupid
11-04-2003, 09:33 PM
Might as well by a blody Xeon.
RamonGTP
11-04-2003, 10:30 PM
The benches i've seen have it ahead of the Athlon 64 3200+ by a pretty good margin. However, I don't believe thats a fair comparison. The EE should be compared with the FX.
stevty2889
11-06-2003, 06:25 AM
If I had a lot of money to spend, I would LOVE to try out a 3.2EE on a SISR659 chipset with 2 gig of RIMM4800 in quad channel mode...
causticVapor
11-06-2003, 10:55 AM
"The Level 3 cache, according to Intel, can preload a graphics frame buffer or a video frame before it is required by the processor, enabling higher throughput and faster frame rates when accessing memory and I/O devices. The extra 2MB of Level 3 cache is a feature added to the P4’s existing 512K of Level 2 cache."
:rolleyes:
Most games will see 2% to -5% gain from that. Worth 500 more bucks? IMHO, no.
Don't use a processor that's designed for SQL and oracle queries as a gaming chip. Sheesh.:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
Most games will see 2% to -5% gain from that. Worth 500 more bucks? IMHO, no.
Don't use a processor that's designed for SQL and oracle queries as a gaming chip. Sheesh.:rolleyes:
OlegB
11-11-2003, 12:07 AM
Ok you're all bashing this new chip and its name.
As for the name, take a look at AMD. Putting "XP" in the processor name soon after Windows XP gets wide advertising...gimmick! CPU naming schemes that don't coincide with clock freq...gimmick! And to throw into the stack of ****, DDR rame naming conventions to compete with rdram...whatever happened to PC66 ram running at 66mhz and pc133 running at 133mhz, whats with the pc2700 that should actually be called pc333? Gimmick!
So get off intel for making an attempt at a more interesting name.
Also, if not for intel there would be no research and development in the field of VLSI and transistor design that drives our little CPUs. Don't think AMD has any goal but to rake in some money. Research for the sake of research is not on the agenda.
As for the name, take a look at AMD. Putting "XP" in the processor name soon after Windows XP gets wide advertising...gimmick! CPU naming schemes that don't coincide with clock freq...gimmick! And to throw into the stack of ****, DDR rame naming conventions to compete with rdram...whatever happened to PC66 ram running at 66mhz and pc133 running at 133mhz, whats with the pc2700 that should actually be called pc333? Gimmick!
So get off intel for making an attempt at a more interesting name.
Also, if not for intel there would be no research and development in the field of VLSI and transistor design that drives our little CPUs. Don't think AMD has any goal but to rake in some money. Research for the sake of research is not on the agenda.
otaku
11-11-2003, 01:10 AM
Here there are some benchmarks and the P4EE seems trashed by the Athlon 64 FX except in just one test....
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,113255,00.asp
Comments welcome! :t
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,113255,00.asp
Comments welcome! :t
iceblue
11-11-2003, 01:31 AM
hah pcworld.
Plaster
11-11-2003, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by OlegB
Ok you're all bashing this new chip and its name.
As for the name, take a look at AMD. Putting "XP" in the processor name soon after Windows XP gets wide advertising...gimmick! CPU naming schemes that don't coincide with clock freq...gimmick! And to throw into the stack of ****, DDR rame naming conventions to compete with rdram...whatever happened to PC66 ram running at 66mhz and pc133 running at 133mhz, whats with the pc2700 that should actually be called pc333? Gimmick!
So get off intel for making an attempt at a more interesting name.
Also, if not for intel there would be no research and development in the field of VLSI and transistor design that drives our little CPUs. Don't think AMD has any goal but to rake in some money. Research for the sake of research is not on the agenda.
lol, talk about a worthless rant. People are complaining about the $1100 pricetag, not the name. A few people used the name to make fun of the price, but not because they thought the name was stupid. Maybe you need more fiber in your diet. :D
Ok you're all bashing this new chip and its name.
As for the name, take a look at AMD. Putting "XP" in the processor name soon after Windows XP gets wide advertising...gimmick! CPU naming schemes that don't coincide with clock freq...gimmick! And to throw into the stack of ****, DDR rame naming conventions to compete with rdram...whatever happened to PC66 ram running at 66mhz and pc133 running at 133mhz, whats with the pc2700 that should actually be called pc333? Gimmick!
So get off intel for making an attempt at a more interesting name.
Also, if not for intel there would be no research and development in the field of VLSI and transistor design that drives our little CPUs. Don't think AMD has any goal but to rake in some money. Research for the sake of research is not on the agenda.
lol, talk about a worthless rant. People are complaining about the $1100 pricetag, not the name. A few people used the name to make fun of the price, but not because they thought the name was stupid. Maybe you need more fiber in your diet. :D
Logan2002
11-11-2003, 06:13 PM
yeah some fibercon might help.
I only major gripe is the price.
I only major gripe is the price.
tasty danish
11-11-2003, 11:39 PM
yeah, if they were to say oh.... update the p4c's with a new "extreme" line that actually was worth the price of the extra cache (50-100 extra bucks seems reasonable) that would be really cool. this new one is just rediculous as is though.
BuildItYourself
11-12-2003, 12:37 AM
Kudos to intel on making a high speed, budget-friendly processor. speed at a price that won't bust the bank.........
NOT
NOT
Someone Stupid
11-13-2003, 02:28 AM
So they are going to have a 3.2EE and they are now planning on releasing a 3.4C (though not EE from what I've heard). Pricey chips there.
Zappattazz
11-26-2003, 09:03 PM
Just because someone says they think the P4EE will cost $1200 a chip -- you passed judgement because you believed it to be true.
Let's take a look at the PCWorld "test" that was linked by otaku:
We tested the P4 EE, a 3.2-GHz CPU with a whopping 2MB L3 cache, on an Alienware PC originally equipped with a standard 3.2-GHz P4. That system included 1GB of memory and an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro graphics card with 256MB of graphics memory--as did each of three Athlon 64 FX-51-based systems (from Alienware, Falcon Northwest, and Voodoo).
For all we know, PCWorld used 1Gb of PC2100 on the P4EE system (single) compared to PC4000 for the 64FX-51 systems (three)!!! They averaged the scores for (3) 64FX-51 systems against (1) P4EE system -- WHY?!?! Is the "performance" of the AMD chip dependant on very specific hardware????
Let's look at the cost:
I went to PCWatch.com to find the lastest prices per unit:
P4EE (as tested by PCWorld) = $388
64FX-51 (as tested by PCWorld) = $731
P4EE fits in your existing 800Mhz mobo and uses your existing memory!
64FX (-3200 or -51) requires NEW MOBO$$$$ and NEW MEMORY$$$$
Let's take a look at the PCWorld "test" that was linked by otaku:
We tested the P4 EE, a 3.2-GHz CPU with a whopping 2MB L3 cache, on an Alienware PC originally equipped with a standard 3.2-GHz P4. That system included 1GB of memory and an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro graphics card with 256MB of graphics memory--as did each of three Athlon 64 FX-51-based systems (from Alienware, Falcon Northwest, and Voodoo).
For all we know, PCWorld used 1Gb of PC2100 on the P4EE system (single) compared to PC4000 for the 64FX-51 systems (three)!!! They averaged the scores for (3) 64FX-51 systems against (1) P4EE system -- WHY?!?! Is the "performance" of the AMD chip dependant on very specific hardware????
Let's look at the cost:
I went to PCWatch.com to find the lastest prices per unit:
P4EE (as tested by PCWorld) = $388
64FX-51 (as tested by PCWorld) = $731
P4EE fits in your existing 800Mhz mobo and uses your existing memory!
64FX (-3200 or -51) requires NEW MOBO$$$$ and NEW MEMORY$$$$
stevty2889
11-27-2003, 01:54 AM
That was the regular 3.2C that was $388, the extreme edition is $1059..I do agree that PCworld had too many variatons between the systems they used for the benchmarks to be accurate. Also there is supposed to be a 3.4EE being released 1st Q. 2004 along with the 3.4c northwood.
Zappattazz
11-28-2003, 08:31 AM
Originally posted by stevty2889
That was the regular 3.2C that was $388, the extreme edition is $1059..I do agree that PCworld had too many variatons between the systems they used for the benchmarks to be accurate. Also there is supposed to be a 3.4EE being released 1st Q. 2004 along with the 3.4c northwood.
Where is the P4EE listed at $1059 each????
That was the regular 3.2C that was $388, the extreme edition is $1059..I do agree that PCworld had too many variatons between the systems they used for the benchmarks to be accurate. Also there is supposed to be a 3.4EE being released 1st Q. 2004 along with the 3.4c northwood.
Where is the P4EE listed at $1059 each????
stevty2889
11-28-2003, 10:48 AM
Look at the last 2 listings on this page, these are the 3.2EE's, the rest are just normal 3.2 P4's
http://www.pricewatch.com/1/3/5633-4.htm
http://www.pricewatch.com/1/3/5633-4.htm
Strawbs
11-28-2003, 01:53 PM
well shut ma mouth! they Are $1059 each! :p
It should also be noted that when you invest in the Athlon64 you are investing in the future, whereas P4EE is just a stop gap measure which will be discontinued just as soon as Intel develope\release an adequate competitor, at which time you will need a new mobo, ram, graphics card, DVD writer, PSU, case, monitor, mouse, lo power light bulbs, washing machine, microwave, carpets, armchair, t.v., remote control, bicycle tyres and a partridge in a pear tree.
Welcome to SysOpt Zapp... :t
It should also be noted that when you invest in the Athlon64 you are investing in the future, whereas P4EE is just a stop gap measure which will be discontinued just as soon as Intel develope\release an adequate competitor, at which time you will need a new mobo, ram, graphics card, DVD writer, PSU, case, monitor, mouse, lo power light bulbs, washing machine, microwave, carpets, armchair, t.v., remote control, bicycle tyres and a partridge in a pear tree.
Welcome to SysOpt Zapp... :t
tasty danish
11-30-2003, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by Strawbs
well shut ma mouth! they Are $1059 each! :p
It should also be noted that when you invest in the Athlon64 you are investing in the future, whereas P4EE is just a stop gap measure which will be discontinued just as soon as Intel develope\release an adequate competitor, at which time you will need a new mobo, ram, graphics card, DVD writer, PSU, case, monitor, mouse, lo power light bulbs, washing machine, microwave, carpets, armchair, t.v., remote control, bicycle tyres and a partridge in a pear tree.
Welcome to SysOpt Zapp... :t
Intel is releasing all this in just 12 days?!?! :D
well shut ma mouth! they Are $1059 each! :p
It should also be noted that when you invest in the Athlon64 you are investing in the future, whereas P4EE is just a stop gap measure which will be discontinued just as soon as Intel develope\release an adequate competitor, at which time you will need a new mobo, ram, graphics card, DVD writer, PSU, case, monitor, mouse, lo power light bulbs, washing machine, microwave, carpets, armchair, t.v., remote control, bicycle tyres and a partridge in a pear tree.
Welcome to SysOpt Zapp... :t
Intel is releasing all this in just 12 days?!?! :D
Rando266
11-30-2003, 05:16 PM
It's probably the same thing as the P4 3.2 GHz.
SysOpt.com
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.