This is a great idea, it'd be helpful in the future if we could also get a chart that displayed all the processor model #'s and their respective speeds in MHz. I still get confused when looking at a Pentium 755 and then wondering how fast it is. AMD's are starting to get the same way.
Ok if we are only talking about new cores that's alright... but could we have a seperate page with descriptions.. actually while you're at it - here's something i seem to need once a week looking at what to get in my machines, work machines, friends machines -- What does each model represent.
ie.
Athlon XP 2600+ = Barton Core 333FSB ??Mhz 512kB cache
OR Thoroughbred Core 333FSB 2083Mhz[12.5x] 256kB cache.
I am extremely confused on those two points in particular.
and the Athon64 is only the S754 variety.. once you throw in 939 and 940.. well I challenge you to come up will a sensible table..
I have searched for a good simple table including all the above type info.
Haven't found it yet.. I end up googling for "Athlon 2600+ Barton clock speed" and only getting that piece of data..
PLEASE OH plEASE do this for me.. I will love you and send you flowers.. oh wait.. KrisTOPHER, that's a guys name.. well I'll love you send you food.
Are we sure the Socket-A Sempron will use the Thoroughbred core? I thought the Tbred was dead and is being replaced by the Thorton core, which in turn is the 256k cache version of the Barton. Yes, I realize a 256k Thorton and a 256k Thoroughbred sound like the same thing, and perform exactly the same, but they are in fact laid out a little differently.
I'll admit I could be wrong of course... Thorton might be just a Barton with 1/2 the cache disabled and/or defective. I've not personally looked at a Thorton. If that's the case, then AMD would either go back to TBred for 256k cache chips, or evolve the Barton/Thorton to a true 256k design.
Yonah/Jonah whatever it is called this week is kind of getting moved around. I think its just getting called something else. The israeli half of intel's operation is much harder to keep up with than the rest of the corp.
#5 - I think the idea is that they're only including processors for which we are still getting updates. Barton and Palamino are "dead" now, as is Duron. Thoroughbred lives on in the Sempron Socket A chip.
On a different note, we're missing some of the future Intel products that we still have names for, I think. I mean, you have Millington, which I doubt any of us will ever own, while you neglect mentioning Jonah. Maybe some mention of what is (will be) and isn't (won't be) included might be nice?
This is a great idea, though - I would love a one-page reference for all future and past Intel and AMD processors with their code names. Hell, can we get a similar page for chipsets as well? :)
Its got a 512K cache core. In fact, I thought 1MB L2 a64s were going to die with last of the clawhammers S754- either the 3700+ or the rumoured 4100+. So maybe the Winchester core should be 512K L2.
what an idea! Now I can keep up a little better; I definitely love the details, but lately it's been getting confusing. Thanks for the info, it'll sure make my life a little easier ;-)
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
15 Comments
Back to Article
rdennison - Monday, August 9, 2004 - link
Hey - where's that chipset cheat sheet you guys are promising?This is a great tool!
FiberOptik - Monday, July 19, 2004 - link
This is a great idea, it'd be helpful in the future if we could also get a chart that displayed all the processor model #'s and their respective speeds in MHz. I still get confused when looking at a Pentium 755 and then wondering how fast it is. AMD's are starting to get the same way.balzi - Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - link
Ok if we are only talking about new cores that's alright... but could we have a seperate page with descriptions.. actually while you're at it - here's something i seem to need once a week looking at what to get in my machines, work machines, friends machines -- What does each model represent.ie.
Athlon XP 2600+ = Barton Core 333FSB ??Mhz 512kB cache
OR Thoroughbred Core 333FSB 2083Mhz[12.5x] 256kB cache.
Athlon64 3200+ ? = 2000/2200Mhz? 512/1024kB cache L2..
that sort of stuff.
I am extremely confused on those two points in particular.
and the Athon64 is only the S754 variety.. once you throw in 939 and 940.. well I challenge you to come up will a sensible table..
I have searched for a good simple table including all the above type info.
Haven't found it yet.. I end up googling for "Athlon 2600+ Barton clock speed" and only getting that piece of data..
PLEASE OH plEASE do this for me.. I will love you and send you flowers.. oh wait.. KrisTOPHER, that's a guys name.. well I'll love you send you food.
thanks
KristopherKubicki - Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - link
According to Intel's roadmaps, it doesnt either! but ive fixed it.Kristopher
Margalus - Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - link
I wonder where my 3.2ghz p4 Gallatin with 512kb l2 and 2mb l3 130nm fits in there? According that chart it doesn't exist!!Bloodshedder - Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - link
I think it would be a good idea to include release dates, both past and projected, for each of these entries.johnsonx - Tuesday, July 13, 2004 - link
Are we sure the Socket-A Sempron will use the Thoroughbred core? I thought the Tbred was dead and is being replaced by the Thorton core, which in turn is the 256k cache version of the Barton. Yes, I realize a 256k Thorton and a 256k Thoroughbred sound like the same thing, and perform exactly the same, but they are in fact laid out a little differently.I'll admit I could be wrong of course... Thorton might be just a Barton with 1/2 the cache disabled and/or defective. I've not personally looked at a Thorton. If that's the case, then AMD would either go back to TBred for 256k cache chips, or evolve the Barton/Thorton to a true 256k design.
Anyone know for sure on this point?
KristopherKubicki - Monday, July 12, 2004 - link
Trogdor, will do.Yonah/Jonah whatever it is called this week is kind of getting moved around. I think its just getting called something else. The israeli half of intel's operation is much harder to keep up with than the rest of the corp.
Kristopher
TrogdorJW - Monday, July 12, 2004 - link
#5 - I think the idea is that they're only including processors for which we are still getting updates. Barton and Palamino are "dead" now, as is Duron. Thoroughbred lives on in the Sempron Socket A chip.On a different note, we're missing some of the future Intel products that we still have names for, I think. I mean, you have Millington, which I doubt any of us will ever own, while you neglect mentioning Jonah. Maybe some mention of what is (will be) and isn't (won't be) included might be nice?
This is a great idea, though - I would love a one-page reference for all future and past Intel and AMD processors with their code names. Hell, can we get a similar page for chipsets as well? :)
EddNog - Monday, July 12, 2004 - link
Toledao Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo Toledo...........balzi - Monday, July 12, 2004 - link
Where's Barton, Palamino??Have I missed something.. you've only got a Sempron sub-group - where's Duron and Athlon XP??
weird..
KristopherKubicki - Monday, July 12, 2004 - link
Hi Pumpkinierre,Good catch on Winchester- i just plugged it in wrong.
Kristopher
Pumpkinierre - Monday, July 12, 2004 - link
What about that S939 90nm that is doing the rounds out there?:http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php...
Its got a 512K cache core. In fact, I thought 1MB L2 a64s were going to die with last of the clawhammers S754- either the 3700+ or the rumoured 4100+. So maybe the Winchester core should be 512K L2.
GhandiInstinct - Monday, July 12, 2004 - link
24MB Cache? WOW!Quiksel - Monday, July 12, 2004 - link
what an idea! Now I can keep up a little better; I definitely love the details, but lately it's been getting confusing. Thanks for the info, it'll sure make my life a little easier ;-)~q~