New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Presscott or Northwood?

post #1 of 11
4/22/04 at 12:16am
Thread Starter 
are the cpus in the i9100 presscotts? Looking at the benchmarks I would assume so, just wanted to find out for sure. Thanks
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 11
4/22/04 at 1:18am
Northwoods
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 11
4/22/04 at 2:42am
what does 2.8G, 80546, 1M, 800 .... mean. it almost sounds like its 1meg cache and that 80546 as far as i can tell means its on the 90nm process.

suggesting its actually a prescott.

My info could be wrong.

later
Jon
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 11
4/22/04 at 7:39am
Thread Starter 
yea, somebodys benchmarks had the sandra page, it said 1024kBECC cache
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 11
4/22/04 at 9:40am

.

My 2.8ghz is a Prescott but seems 3ghz+ is Northwoods.
And some get 2.8ghz Northwoods as well.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 11
4/22/04 at 11:17am
AFAIK Intel is not making Prescotts yet at more than 3.2 GHz. So the 3.4 GHz systems should be Northwood, at least for the time being.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 11
4/22/04 at 11:24am
I think some people got Presscotts and most got Northwoods I believe that the only Presscotts i've heard of people having, have been the 2.8 version.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 11
4/22/04 at 11:28am
so if i got a prescott (think i did from model info) would this be good or bad?? I thought i heard they run way hotter than the northwood?? And have slightly higher mem latencies because of the cache size.

Later
Jon
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 11
4/22/04 at 1:55pm
My 2.8 9100 has a Prescott in it. And, after reading tons of write-ups on the subject I still haven't decided if that's good or bad.... I get a 3dmark03 of 3130 out of the box....
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 11
4/22/04 at 3:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBee
My 2.8 9100 has a Prescott in it. And, after reading tons of write-ups on the subject I still haven't decided if that's good or bad.... I get a 3dmark03 of 3130 out of the box....

Great score jaybee, prescott is only supposed to be bad in the sense that it runs hotter, beyond that i don't think that there are any real performance differences
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 11
4/22/04 at 4:32pm
Thread Starter 
Any additional latency from the cache is more than made up for by the fact that it has 1mb of it. in any cache intensive app that is.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home