Well it is about good time someone did something like this, well for one, new technologies are kicking in. Many doors will open and many new features will be provided to users from home, organizations and etc. The past few months have been highly rapid where Intel was launching one after the other.

I seriously do not know how this is going to affect the market. For one, the next upgrade for home user may consist of a change of mainboards and etc. Manufacturers have to clear their stock before the new wave and prepare themselves well for the upcoming technology. The next few years will be one of the fastest technology turn over since the Pentium II.

I am also deeply dying to know how will AMD come up to the challenge and keep up with Intel. The rival will need to put in lots of R&D into this to get back to competition. Even now as we know it the Prescotts have highly outdone the AMDs with extreme speeds and extreme overclocking capabilities.

On the other hand, changes like this affect global markets that makes me shake. This is simply because it is a huge leap towards better, more powerful solutions within such a short period of time. Fast pace changes aren't always the best.

We could also say goodbye to the days where people use to say that computers consume lower powers. Hmm that is definetely different now. As said in the article, power consumption of the Prescotts have a tremendous increase of 25%. Now thats another big leap.

I like to say to the community do not fret, it is all in good time. We will definetely see better and more stable features that power your daily live and your tasks. Lets give it a thumbs up for Intel Corporation. Congratulations and all the best.

Regards,
Sailendran Iswara Jothi

shoot amds dont need the same amt ghz to get the same amt of work done as a P4 at 3.2ghz, 3200+ AMD Athlon XP runs only at 2.2 ghz and beats on an intel P4, the 1st gen prescotts suck totally as the Old Northwoods could beat it out.

btw intel isnt really going towards the performance approach anymore

Please justify your statement that Prescott suck and no it is not true that Northwoods can beat it. The only weakness of a Prescott is that is dissipates more heat than the Northwoods and consumes more power. Power should not be an issue since more 480 watts.

Personally, I recently got a Prescott 2.8 E, I manage to overclocked the CPU to a good 4 Ghz with a running temperature of 62 degress with AeroCool Deep Impact Cooling Solution. It is proven by many benchmarkers and personally myself that Prescott runs more stable at greater temperatures and excellent overclocking capabilities compared to the AMD.

Regards,
Sailendran Iswara Jothi

but they still suck because of the price.

In my opinion, Intel is REALLY having a hard time keeping up with new AMD 64 bit. As you look back since AMD launch its new 64 bit generation, Intel starts to struggle. 1st, right after AMD64 released, Intel launched the P4 Extrem Edition which is extreme high priced ($1000 USD), but its performance still a big loss to AMD. Then Intel starts coming up with the idea of .90 nmm transitor on the P4 Prescott, and untill now Prescott is still a SHAME for Intell. I say Presscot is a Shame for Intel because its overall rating is so bad, for example , High power comsumtion, high temp, not much speed improvement can be noticed. And in close future Intel plains to release more crappy stuff such as socket 775 or 32 bit Procesoors that can run 64 bits softwares?!!??. I would laugh till tomorow for this kind of solution LOL... Again WHAT A SHAME FOR INTEL!

I'm sick of newbs that brag up intel. Why? Why brag them up though, really. Why even think about buying one? When you can buy just as good/usually better AMD processor for 1/2 the cost? makes no sense to me really. how could you be stupid enough to make this mistake? The only thing intel is good is video editing anyways, yes their O.K in games, but AMD whoopes them there. I think AMD are just an *overall* better processor in terms of price/performance. Why can they see that?!

Just for the records, Extreme Edition Processors are running Prescotts and I only tell you the difference because I have an Intel plus an AMD machine. By the way you should see the millions people who have been with AMD so long have now converted to Prescott based Intel Processors because of high performance and it is infact beating the AMD. As for 64-bit I agree that AMD is one step ahead but I think new generation prescott (non P4s) will be 64 bit.

High Power consumption is true, there is a reason. Hyper Threading actually uses more power plus the technology 0.90 mm is more smaller and uses more power but boosts stability at higher temperature. This is why a Prescott can run up 93 Degrees with stable operation. Overclocked to 4.3 Ghz. How much or how far can the AMD go without water cooling????!!!

Regards,
Sailendran Iswara Jothi

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030623/p4_3200-07.html
check the link above, it should clear your doubts.

Regards,
Sailendran Iswara Jothi

Correction not extreme edition only Es are Prescotts not EEs

Regards,
Sailendran Iswara Jothi.

Okay, I did my research. Compared to AMD ATHLON FX and Intel Pentium 4E and EE, there are games where AMD performs much better than the Prescotts or EEs. In video and audio technology Intel Rules. Extreme performance is good as well as multi tasking where AMD looses the edge. Anyway I advice gamers to go for AMD, I am not sure about the cost, but does developers out there it is recommended to go for Intels. I am still a proud support of Intel, due to its stability, overclocking capabilities as well as power to push applications to the limit when overclocked.

I recommend Intel to overclockers, as it most unlikely to end up with a toast processor providing that overclocking is highly controlled by the type of chasis as well as the processor cooler. With the right cooler and chassis you can push your processor to the most extreme limits (even more than the AMD). I am telling you because I tried it myself, the experience was unforgettable.

So AMD fans out there, I salute the processor for extreme gaming performance. Definetely wins my personal award. Otherwise for overclocking and such I will settle for an Intel on the mountain where AMD was once the king.

Regards,
Sailendran Iswara Jothi

What to expect? Hmmm Or Intel Vs AMD ??

We have plenty of topics like these......i would say...i love AMD for the price they offer for their products...and dont you say Prescotts are great....i have seen their peformance ..i build up 4 prescotts 2.4....they really really sucks.

AMD - Price / Performance

INTeL - Overpriced

Dude those are not Prescotts those are Northwoods, Prescotts rannge from 2.8 and above. Before judging processors a benchmark should be done, just buy building the PCs won't help much.

Please take note

Regards,
Sailendran Iswara Jothi

LMAO Ohhhhh Really ???

whats 2.4B ? not prescott ? ..........are u sure Northwood...i think u need to browse internet a bit more and for your kind information it was written (PRESCOTT) on back of Intel package too ....and DONT TELL me about benchmarks ....i had enuf with benchmarks.

LOL...........Please take note

Prescott clock speeds will initially range from 2.8GHz to 3.4GHz. To keep Prescott-based P4s distinct from older "Northwood" cores, Intel is tacking an "E" on to the product names.

Sorry to dissapoint you guys. The statement above was taken from Tech-Report.Com and this is true if you search for the Intel whitepaper on Prescott. Please inform me if the processor you have installed (2.4B) I could check with a friend in Intel. A picture will be greatly appreciated. Can be sent to my e-mail sailendran83@time.net.my.

Just want to point out I am not trying to argue but trying to get the facts straight. This is really Crucial to the research work I do for myself. Thanks a lot. Its great having a couple of guys talking over Intel and AMD.

Regards,
Sailendran Iswara Jothi

P.S: Sorry for being a prick