Intel's Pentium Extreme Edition 955: 65nm, 4 threads and 376M transistors
by Anand Lal Shimpi on December 30, 2005 11:36 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Final Words
The Pentium Extreme Edition 955 finally starts to bring some respectable performance to Intel's high end processors, but there is no clear cut victory. In applications and usage scenarios where the EE's ability to execute four threads simultaneously comes into play, it generally can remain quite competitive with the Athlon 64 X2 4800+. However, looking at older applications, single threaded scenarios and some multithreaded applications that aren't optimized for more than two threads, the EE 955 falls significantly behind.
There are a few other conclusions that we can draw based on what we've seen thus far. For starters, Hyper Threading is quite important to the performance of the Extreme Edition 955. While it isn't always perfect, when under very heavy multitasking loads, the ability to execute more threads translates into better overall performance for the entire system.
We've also been able to take an early look at the state of multithreaded game development, through the latest Call of Duty 2 and Quake 4 patches. Although the performance in CoD2 was terrible in SMP mode, Quake 4 gave us some hope, with performance gains approaching the 50% mark on dual core processors at CPU bound resolutions.
As far as the processor at hand is concerned, Intel has done a reasonable job with the Pentium EE 955, but with Conroe not too far away, we just can't justify recommending it. If you absolutely must upgrade today, the Athlon 64 X2 is still probably going to be a better bang for your buck. However, as we have seen in the benchmarks, there are advantages to being able to execute four threads simultaneously.
It is pretty much a toss-up at this point, but we'd recommend sticking with AMD for now and re-evaluating Intel's offerings when Conroe arrives. If all goes well, we will have a cooler running, faster processor with Conroe that may provide some even tougher competition for AMD's Athlon 64 X2.
While we're not emphatically recommending Intel's latest and greatest, we are impressed with Intel's transition to 65nm thus far. If Intel can use Cedar Mill and Presler to ramp up their 65nm process, hopefully it will be primed and ready for Conroe's introduction later this year. From what we've seen of Yonah, Intel does have their work cut out for them in order to truly regain the performance crown with Conroe, but anything is possible. A successful migration to 65nm would be a definite step in the right direction for Intel.
More than anything, we're hoping not to be disappointed by Conroe. We vividly remember recommending to wait for the original Pentium 4's release and then once more for Prescott's release, and both times being terribly disappointed by Intel's decisions. Let's hope that with the Pentium M team at the helm, Conroe's introduction will be a change of tradition for Intel.
The Pentium Extreme Edition 955 finally starts to bring some respectable performance to Intel's high end processors, but there is no clear cut victory. In applications and usage scenarios where the EE's ability to execute four threads simultaneously comes into play, it generally can remain quite competitive with the Athlon 64 X2 4800+. However, looking at older applications, single threaded scenarios and some multithreaded applications that aren't optimized for more than two threads, the EE 955 falls significantly behind.
There are a few other conclusions that we can draw based on what we've seen thus far. For starters, Hyper Threading is quite important to the performance of the Extreme Edition 955. While it isn't always perfect, when under very heavy multitasking loads, the ability to execute more threads translates into better overall performance for the entire system.
We've also been able to take an early look at the state of multithreaded game development, through the latest Call of Duty 2 and Quake 4 patches. Although the performance in CoD2 was terrible in SMP mode, Quake 4 gave us some hope, with performance gains approaching the 50% mark on dual core processors at CPU bound resolutions.
As far as the processor at hand is concerned, Intel has done a reasonable job with the Pentium EE 955, but with Conroe not too far away, we just can't justify recommending it. If you absolutely must upgrade today, the Athlon 64 X2 is still probably going to be a better bang for your buck. However, as we have seen in the benchmarks, there are advantages to being able to execute four threads simultaneously.
It is pretty much a toss-up at this point, but we'd recommend sticking with AMD for now and re-evaluating Intel's offerings when Conroe arrives. If all goes well, we will have a cooler running, faster processor with Conroe that may provide some even tougher competition for AMD's Athlon 64 X2.
While we're not emphatically recommending Intel's latest and greatest, we are impressed with Intel's transition to 65nm thus far. If Intel can use Cedar Mill and Presler to ramp up their 65nm process, hopefully it will be primed and ready for Conroe's introduction later this year. From what we've seen of Yonah, Intel does have their work cut out for them in order to truly regain the performance crown with Conroe, but anything is possible. A successful migration to 65nm would be a definite step in the right direction for Intel.
More than anything, we're hoping not to be disappointed by Conroe. We vividly remember recommending to wait for the original Pentium 4's release and then once more for Prescott's release, and both times being terribly disappointed by Intel's decisions. Let's hope that with the Pentium M team at the helm, Conroe's introduction will be a change of tradition for Intel.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
84 Comments
View All Comments
Aenslead - Saturday, December 31, 2005 - link
As J.J., from Spider-Man would say:"Ceap, crap, mega-crap!" and then toss it away.
ElJefe - Saturday, December 31, 2005 - link
well it does move very fast in games. that is nice to see finally.it would be great if the overall power draw numbers were shown as on tomshardware. even there they showed a 90 watt difference between 4800 and the new 65nm. and that wasnt on the oc'd one. The oc'd one showed 150 more watts draw.
Viditor - Saturday, December 31, 2005 - link
Agreed...if it weren't for the X2, this would be an excellent chip by comparison!
Betwon - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link
Now, anandtech begin to learn the truth. There are still many knowledge about CPU that anandtech need to learn.The resluts of tests are simple and clear, but the reasons are complex.
In past years, anandtech took many mistakes about the correct reasons.
bldckstark - Monday, January 2, 2006 - link
You do realize that none of this stuff is very important, right? Both chips work well. Nobody should be criticized for buying either one of them.I love my FIVE computers but making sure my wife and kids are healthy and happy is way more important than any electronic device, especially just one piece of it.
Your damaging and hostile statements are making it appear as if you have forgotten this and the most important thing in the world is that you make all of us geeks think Anandtech is not perfect. News update - WE ALL KNOW THAT! We still like it.
bob4432 - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link
why don't you do the gaming benchmark with bf2 fps unlocked? it appears that it is just hitting its built in lock with both the fx-57 and also P955 EE 3.46 cpus.Spacecomber - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link
I believe that they are using the timedemo feature of the game and that the frame rate max doesn't affect this. It would be nice to see more than just average frame rates reported for games, though. At least a range should be mentioned and maybe a standard deviation.Space
Betwon - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link
We see a test, where the average fps of PD is less than (about 1% - 2%) the fps of AMD's. But PD's fps is more stable than AMD's.In the case that the average fps of netburst is better than the average fps of K8, the test shows that netburst is more stable than K8.
Betwon - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link
The test isn't bf2.bob4432 - Friday, December 30, 2005 - link
any link you could give me on how to do the time demo from within bf2? is this new with the 1.12 patch?thanks