Uh-oh, dual-core Pentium 4 TDP figures leaked...

meglamaniac · Post by **meglamaniac** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 7:46 am

...and they're NOT pretty.
I'll be sticking to AMD, methinks.

Pjotor · Post by **Pjotor** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 7:59 am

They should change the codename from "Smithfield" to "Blacksmith field". Makes more sense.

LBadvance · Post by **LBadvance** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 8:08 am

*faints*

sgtpokey · Post by **sgtpokey** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 8:57 am

I'll be sticking to AMD, methinks.

For me it's more: I'll stick with single core for at least another year. There's no getting around the fact that dual cores are going to put out significantly more heat than a single core.

I don't forsee me doing anything cool with a dual core system anytime soon that I wouldn't be able to do with a nice fast single core (SLI dual video cards fall into the same boat for me)

Qwertyiopisme · Post by **Qwertyiopisme** » Wed Jan 19, 2005 9:08 am

Krispy · Post by **Krispy** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 4:54 am

As they approach the limits of "nano circuitry" I think we're going to be seeing more dual cores in a search for "reliabilty".

Question is- At 130w will it be so "reliable" during the summer? I can't see this CPU being popular round here?

SometimesWarrior · Post by **SometimesWarrior** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 5:35 am

That much heat being radiated from such a small chip... we're approaching the w/m^2 of the sun's surface (or not... I have no idea how much energy the sun emits). Remember to wear your

's when you boot up your PC!

jensend · Post by **jensend** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 6:51 am

SometimesWarrior wrote:That much heat being radiated from such a small chip... we're approaching the w/m^2 of the sun's surface (or not... I have no idea how much energy the sun emits). Remember to wear your 8)'s when you boot up your PC!

A quick calculation from the figures at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun gives about 6289 W/cm^2. Smithfield's die size is over twice that of the Prescott, so Prescott is still the winner of the dubious highest-watts-per-cm^2 award with right about 100 W/cm^2. CPUs still have 1.8 orders of magnitude to go.

Beyonder · Post by **Beyonder** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:57 am

I think it'll end up being even higher than 130 W total dissipation. THG assumed that was a .65 process, but it's probably just going to be two prescott cores slapped together, which are .90 nm chips.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was more like ~150 W.

Tobias · Post by **Tobias** » Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:27 am

Assuming that their TDP is about 70% of Max as with prescott... ->183W!!!

halcyon · Post by **halcyon** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 10:29 pm

As you know, the furnace Intel calls Prescott (P4) is dead and will be replaced by dual cores.

"The heat will kill us", I hear you scream.

Well, not necessarily.

The following is good news:

"The company also updated power consumption for Pentium D (Smithfield). "There will be processors at a level of 90 to 95 watts," Inkley said."

While still a far cry from 60W of slower A64s, it's much better than the old 130W of Prescotts and the worst rumoured Smithfield figures. I'm sure there'll be both though (hotter and a little less hot), depending on the model.

Also, about the future:

"Intel engineers also pointed out that 60 watts would be "on the horizon" and they could not say which products will achieve this power level in which timeframe."

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20 ... 04846.html

Let's hope that doesn't only mean the lowest performing parts. However, even if it's just that, its still welcome.

Just FYI.

ckolivas · Post by **ckolivas** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:51 am

Pentium M (dothan) based chips for a new bus speed and desktop are their next big thing, including dual core pentium Ms... and we already know how good these chips are for power consumption.

Mariner · Post by **Mariner** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:55 am

Perhaps someone could invent a miniature steam turbine which could be attached to your Prescott/Smithfield chip? This could generate power to run an air conditioning unit to help cool your room!

ckolivas · Post by **ckolivas** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:57 am

Mariner wrote:Perhaps someone could invent a miniature steam turbine which could be attached to your Prescott/Smithfield chip? This could generate power to run an air conditioning unit to help cool your room!

Laugh all you want; when it gets cold in here there's nothing like firing up cpuburn to keep me warm.

Mariner · Post by **Mariner** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 3:00 am

ckolivas wrote: Laugh all you want; when it gets cold in here there's nothing like firing up cpuburn to keep me warm.

Well, I suppose you could also hook up the turbine to an electric heater instead of a refridgeration unit...

Green Shoes · Post by **Green Shoes** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:26 am

Has anyone been paying much attention to IDF? I've read that they have demos of the Smithfields there, but that they're only running at 2.0 GHz. Since these are supposed to come out in one quarter at 3.0 GHz......can we say "delayed?"

Green Shoes · Post by **Green Shoes** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:55 am

*UPDATE*

New THG article, a follow-up to the one that started this thread, can be seen here.

Mariner · Post by **Mariner** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 7:52 am

Well, we know Intel is intending to give up on the Netburst architecture in favour of the PentiumM technology.

The problem is that they can't do this overnight, hence the Smithfield chips.

Roll on Yonah, I say.

benx · Post by **benx** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:37 am

Actualy the heat is not a big problem. Let them itroduce a new socket design where we can install big ass heatsinks on. i am not borderd by it, i am not draging my pc to lanparty's. I use my laptop!

But with heat also comes alot of power consumption and that is a realy bad thing^^

uhh my first post

Schlotkins · Post by **Schlotkins** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 1:14 pm

Of course, we haven't heard what AMDs numbers will be... amdzone is saying they will have 2.4ghz dual core parts. I'm guessing 110 for these easy. I'm waiting to hear though - I want to do an upgrade and my big programs (photoshop, SAS) are definitely helped by dual cores, so we'll see..

~El~Jefe~ · Post by **~El~Jefe~** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 8:44 pm

Schlotkins wrote:Of course, we haven't heard what AMDs numbers will be... amdzone is saying they will have 2.4ghz dual core parts. I'm guessing 110 for these easy. I'm waiting to hear though - I want to do an upgrade and my big programs (photoshop, SAS) are definitely helped by dual cores, so we'll see..

I see no real reason for dual core and amd besides to beat intel. if you want a good photoshop rig, try out a dual Opteron setup. now thats some smoothe stuff. Dual core might be faster, but im not sure anyone on this forum can realistically say that a dual opteron wouldnt meet their art needs. I dont see george lucas posting.

Tobias · Post by **Tobias** » Fri Mar 04, 2005 12:50 am

Mariner wrote:Well, we know Intel is intending to give up on the Netburst architecture in favour of the PentiumM technology.

Concidering that Netburst and the P4 was designed for scalability and Pentium M was designed with a very clear thermal ceiling, that is not very likely. Since Pentium M isn't very scalable it wouldn't stand much chance against A64 in marketing purposes. Don't get me wrong, P M is the most effective CPU out there and I would love it if Intel really got their heat dissipation into check. But that will not be P M, but a heavily modified P4.

Mariner · Post by **Mariner** » Fri Mar 04, 2005 3:05 am

Actually, Anandtech have a reasonable review of the events of IDF. It appears that in the future Intel are moving back towards a shorter pipeline than Prescott - something closer to what Pentium M is at the moment.

It looks as though Yonah is a development of Dothan as expect with added floating point capabilities (SSE3 etc) which should make it a better proposition for desktop PCs. I know it is only really planned for the mobile platform at present but I wonder if it wouldn't be better for Intel to move this technology over to the desktop in the short term whilst they are developing their newer non-netburst 'Pentium whatever'.

Thankfully for silent PC enthusiasts, it looks as though Intel have finally seen sense as regards the amount of heat output by their CPUs!

ckolivas · Post by **ckolivas** » Sun Mar 06, 2005 2:38 am

Mariner wrote:Actually, Anandtech have a reasonable review of the events of IDF. It appears that in the future Intel are moving back towards a shorter pipeline than Prescott - something closer to what Pentium M is at the moment.

As a linux kernel developer I've been fortunate to know from Intel what they are doing. The pentiumM core is to be developed as you say, with a slightly longer pipeline than the current pentiumM and they'll shoehorn in all the extra capabilities from p4 and will be pushing dual core.

Thankfully for silent PC enthusiasts, it looks as though Intel have finally seen sense as regards the amount of heat output by their CPUs!

It's not just seeing sense; they have no choice as heat is now a problem limiting development rather than a nuisance, and fortunately the market has wisened up to realise pure speed is not the determinant of performance. AMD is to be applauded for being responsible for pointing this out to the world and stop this endless GHz nonsense. Give us good architecture and more cache anyday compared to more speed. Of course, as we're all aware, most decisions are marketing hype driven rather than solid engineering.

Uh-oh, dual-core Pentium 4 TDP figures leaked...

Uh-oh, dual-core Pentium 4 TDP figures leaked...

Re: Uh-oh, dual-core Pentium 4 TDP figures leaked...