Waiting online. ． ． ． Questions about Tualatin cpu

The main frequency of Tualatin P3 is 1.26-1.4, and the main frequency of Tualatin C3 is 1.0-1.4

Regarding supplementary questions: Please buy Tualatin C3 1.0 or 1.1, 50 yuan about. Or Tualatin P31.4, about 200 yuan. 815EPT motherboard, about 100 yuan. For graphics cards, please purchase the 9600 mobile version or the 9550, which costs 150 yuan and is the most cost-effective AGP graphics card.

The following article I forwarded was not found intentionally, but something I saw on the forum earlier. I thought it was well written, and I got a Tualatin C3 accordingly.

The article mainly details the emergence and development of Tualatin Cy Young and Tualatin P3. You can also go here to read it directly

/topic.jsp?tid=6477512amp; lastUpdate=04-26.20:54

It is advisable to learn from the past when looking at the present.

Reposted from ZOL An Untimely Sacrifice Talking about Intel Tualatin Processor

Abstract: Is the popular braised pork a descendant of Tualatin? I happened to buy the machine in January 2002. At that time, the p4 1.6 cost a little more than 1,000, the 845D board also cost more than 900, the Tualatin Cy Young 1.0 cost 600, and the 815ept board cost more than 600. Fortunately, I bought Tualatin at that time and did not waste my money in vain. After overclocking, Tualatin p4 2.0 and below are no match. I am still using it now. The performance is really strong and it is absolutely classic. It is the 815 series architecture and sdram that limit the further improvement of its performance.

This article mainly elaborates on the following issues:

1. A brief discussion on the classification and technology of Tualatin;

2. Why Intel launched Tualatin;

3. Tualatin and Pentium 4, which one has better performance;

4. The fatal flaw of Pentium 4 is that thin and light notebooks rely on Tualatin;

5. Pentium 4 stopped at 3.8GHz, and Intel found its way back;

6. Core Duo sacrifices Tualatin: Pentium 4 NetBurst architecture ends, and the ancient P6 architecture reappears

Part 1 of Tualatin A brief discussion on classification and technology

Tualatin, the English name is Tualatin, is the name of a river in the United States. This is the core development code name of Intel's last Pentium III processor. Tualatin Pentium 3 has a very short history, but it has a special status. Don’t forget that the desktop version of Pentium III has three cores: the oldest Katmai Pentium III (actually the core of Pentium II plus SSE instruction set, 0.25 micron process, 512KB half-speed L2 cache, Slot 1 interface), and the most popular Coppermine Pentium III (0.18 micron process, 256KB full-speed L2 cache, Socket 370 and Slot 1 interfaces), and the protagonist of this article, Tualatin Pentium III (0.13 micron process, 256KB full-speed L2 cache, Socket 370 interface). Among the three Pentium IIIs, only Tualatin is listed separately to show the essential difference from the other two Pentium IIIs: Tualatin Pentium III combines the advantages of the ancient P6 architecture, with high performance, low power consumption, and low power consumption. The advantage of heat generation is the ultimate of Pentium III, and it is also the ultimate of P6 microprocessor architecture before the emergence of Pentium M and Core (these two processors still inherit the P6 architecture). To this day, even second-hand notebook merchants who do not understand CPU technology know how to use the name "Tualatin" to flaunt the uniqueness of their Pentium III second-hand notebooks. This shows Tualatin's sacred status in the hearts of users.

The above are all for desktop version processors. In fact, in addition to the desktop version, Tualatin also has a mobile version and a server version. The desktop version also has Pentium III and Celeron. Let’s introduce their differences in detail below.

Let’s talk about the desktop version of Latin Pentium III first.

This processor has many similarities with the 133MHz FSB Coppermine Pentium III: both have 133MHz FSB, and also have 256KB full-speed L2 cache. The difference is that Tualatin Pentium III does not support dual-way processing. The parallel operating mode of the processor is supported by the Coppermine Pentium III; the L2 cache latency of the Tualatin Pentium III is 1 while the Coppermine Pentium III is 0; the Tualatin Pentium III supports the data pre-reading technology adopted since Pentium 4 while the Coppermine Pentium III Pentium III is not supported. Therefore, in terms of performance, the Tualatin Pentium III with the same clock speed is not faster than the Coppermine Pentium III (data pre-reading technology can make up for the performance loss caused by the long secondary cache delay time). Tualatin Pentium III has the following models: 1A GHz/1.13A GHz/1.2 GHz/1.33GHz.

Let’s talk about the desktop Latin Cy Young. Many people think that the Tualatin Celeron is the Tualatin Pentium III with 100MHz FSB. This is incorrect. The performance of the Tualatin Celeron is lower than that of the Tualatin Pentium III with the same clock speed. In addition to the low FSB, the Tualatin Celeron only supports simplified data pre-reading technology (there is also a saying that it is not supported at all. In the author's hands The data is limited, so I won’t make a demonstration). In addition, the bit width of the second-level cache is also low, so it cannot be compared with the Tualatin Pentium III. According to my testing, the performance of the Tualatin Celeron 1.4 GHz is slightly lower than the Tualatin Pentium III 1.13A GHz, but higher than the 1GHz Coppermine/Tualatin Pentium III. Tualatin Celeron has the following models: 900A GHz/1A GHz/1.1A GHz/1.2 GHz/1.3GHz/1.4 GHz. Many people deny that Tualatin Celeron has a 1.4GHz version. In fact, IBM NetVista A22 has a Celeron 1.4 GHz model, and I bought one.

Third, let’s talk about the server version of Tualatin Pentium III-S. This processor is the performance king of the Tualatin family, and the price is also surprisingly expensive (I have two models in my collection: 1.26GHz and 1.4GHz). Tualatin Pentium III-S is aimed at the dual-socket server market. It uses 133MHz FSB, has 512KB full-speed L2 cache, L2 cache latency is 0, supports enhanced data pre-reading technology, and has extremely powerful performance. At that time, many foreign English hardware evaluation websites had comparative evaluations of Tualatin Pentium III-S and Pentium 4/Athlon XP. Taking the evaluation of Tom's Hardware Guide website as an example, when using the 815 platform and PC133 SDRAM memory, the Tualatin Pentium III-S 1.26GHz defeated the Pentium 4 1.8GHz of the 850 platform and PC800 Rambus memory. Tualatin Pentium III-S is available in the following models: 1.13 GHz/1.26 GHz/1.4 GHz. In addition, there are a very small number of 1.53 GHz engineering samples scattered in famous hardware evaluation rooms around the world.

Finally, let’s talk about the mobile version of Tualatin Pentium III-M. The technical characteristics of this processor are basically the same as the desktop version of the Tulatina Pentium III, but the L2 cache is increased to 512KB. The performance at the same main frequency is obviously better than the desktop version of the Tulatina Pentium III and directly catches up with the Tulatina Pentium III-S. Tualatin Pentium III-M obviously has a higher status than the desktop version of Tualatin Pentium III, because the mobile version of Pentium 4 processor generates heat and consumes a lot of power, making it difficult to apply to thin and light notebooks. In contrast, Tualatin has low heat and low power consumption. Pentium III-M has its place and has made great progress. Until Pentium M appeared, Tualatin Pentium III-M was the natural choice for thin and light notebooks. The desktop version of Pentium III threatens Pentium 4 because its performance is too strong, so Intel artificially suppresses it: castrates the second-level cache, keeps the price high and production low, encourages brand machine manufacturers to adopt Pentium 4 and other unfair market measures.

There are many and complicated models of Tualatin Pentium III-M. Taking the normal voltage version as an example, there are mainly 866 MHz/933 MHz/1 GHz/1.13 GHz/1.2 GHz/1.33 GHz and other models.

Part 2 Why Intel launched Tualatin

The era of Pentium III and previous microprocessors was an era in which processor performance and main frequency were closely integrated. At that time, whether it was Intel or AMD, while their processor products were increasing in frequency, they would also bring corresponding performance improvements. Taking the Katmai Pentium III as an example, with the same FSB, every time the main frequency is increased by 50MHz, the performance will increase by about 7 (refer to "PC Shopper-Electronic Test"). At that time, the processor competition between Intel and AMD was the same as it is now. In the final analysis, it was a battle for performance. But at that time, the performance of the processor and the main frequency were combined into one thing, so the performance battle was also the main frequency battle. Since the launch of the 4004 microprocessor, Intel has been the leader in microprocessor performance (that is, main frequency), while Cyrix and AMD have been followers. This situation continued until the Pentium III era and until the launch of AMD Athlon . I still remember that when AMD announced in advance that it would release a new architecture Athlon processor with a main frequency of 600MHz, Intel was panicked. At that time, the Pentium III was still stuck in the 0.25 micron process era, and the maximum main frequency was only 550MHz. If AMD was allowed to surpass it, where would the reputation of the microprocessor leader be? So Intel hurriedly added 0.05v voltage to Pentium III and launched the Pentium III 600MHz processor first to save face. Who would have thought that when AMD released the Athlon 600MHz processor as scheduled, it also released the Athlon 650MHz processor that had not been announced before! This is a great moment. For the first time in the history of microprocessor development, Intel was surpassed by its competitors! Intel, which suffered a blow, began to make confused moves. First, it increased the FSB of the Katmai core Pentium III to 133MHz, and launched the Pentium III 533B and Pentium III 600B (some people described these two processors as new cores, codenamed Confidential, what a big joke. Please check what Confidential means by yourself. Any engineering sample processor from Intel that has not been officially released has the Confidential mark), but its performance cannot compete with the Athlon with the same main frequency, so it uses 0.18 micron The Coppermine Pentium III made its debut in a hurry, with main frequency ranging from 500E MHz to 700MHz, interfaces from Slot 1 to Socket 370, FSB 100MHz and 133MHz, and dozens of models, which is dazzling. The Coppermine Pentium III's L2 cache is 256KB full speed, with a latency of 0, and the bit width is higher than the Katmai Pentium III's 512KB half-speed L2 cache. Therefore, the performance has been significantly improved, and it is a winner and loser compared to the Athlon with the same main frequency. , basically the same. At this time, the competition between Intel and AMD has reached a fever pitch, and the battle for main frequency has become more intense than ever. High frequency means high performance, and the impact of the 1GHz mark became particularly eye-catching. At that time, Intel was desperately looking for the best-processed silicon wafers, hoping to be the first to manufacture a 1GHz processor. This also made the 933MHz high The production of Pentium III with the main frequency is very small and out of stock (because the best silicon wafers are used to produce and test the 1GHz Pentium III)...

The first to reach the main frequency of 1GHz was AMD's Athlon. It is only less than a month ahead of the Pentium III by 1GHz, but this is enough to make AMD proud.

The only fly in the ointment is that the 1GHz Athlon performance is not as good as the 1GHz Pentium III. This is because AMD cannot find an Athlon L2 cache chip that can run stably at 500MHz (the earliest Athlon L2 cache is also a chip external to the CPU PCB board) , running at half the main frequency of the processor), so the running speed of the second-level cache has to be reduced to one-third of the main frequency of the CPU, which is 333.3MHz. Although the second-level cache of the Pentium III 1GHz processor has a larger capacity Small, but with a running speed of up to 1GHz. Relying on a powerful second-level cache, the 1GHz Pentium III defeated the 1GHz Athlon in performance, which somewhat saved Intel's face.

But things are not that simple.

AMD has realized the shortcomings of external half-speed cache and decided to develop Athlon XP with L2 cache On Die. This is what scares Intel the most, so Intel wants to launch the 1.13GHz Pentium III first to take the lead in performance, and then build a 0.13 micron process production line to use Tualatin to compete with Athlon XP. The backup plan is Pentium 4 Willamette. This is because Intel can use the 0.18 micron process to produce Pentium 4, but because Pentium 4 is high-frequency and low-energy, it cannot exert its power until the main frequency is increased to a certain extent (for example, above 2GHZ), and the NetBurst architecture of Pentium 4 is required Hyper-threading and high FSB are combined, so Intel does not want Pentium 4 to debut prematurely, but instead places its hope on Tualatin. The technical parameters of the Tualatin desktop processor planned by Intel at that time to the media were basically the same as those of the actual production Tualatin Pentium III-S, except that the FSB was increased to 166MHz/200MHz, and the planned 830 chipset was also prepared to support DDR memory. , which is quite exciting. It's a pity that God's calculations are not as good as those of humans. The 0.18 micron process at that time was used for less than a year, and it was really difficult to produce the 1.13GHz Pentium III. The consequence of Intel's overlord's hard push is to fully recall the Pentium III 1.13GHz processor that can barely run normally. At this time, AMD was happily introducing to the media their just-launched 1.1GHz Athlon -The performance debate has turned into a pure frequency battle to divert public attention. So, the Pentium 4 1.4 GHz/1.5 GHz was released, which suddenly attracted the attention of the world. People could never imagine that Intel, which had just recycled the 1.13GHz processor, could immediately come up with such an awesome processor, 1.5 GHz. Na! At this time, naive people are still looking at the Pentium 4 with the fixed formula that the main frequency is the performance, and they have fallen into Intel's trick.

But there is always a sober person, and that is the impartial hardware review media.

On the eve of the release of Pentium 4 1.4 GHz/1.5 GHz, some review media questioned: Why is the main frequency of Pentium 4 so high, but many actual test items are not as good as the 1GHz Pentium III? Intel's answer to this is: Pentium 4 is a brand-new architecture, and its performance cannot be judged from traditional viewpoints. It is meaningless to compare the 1.5GHz Pentium 4 with the 1GHz Pentium III. But the Pentium is also a brand new architecture compared to the 486. Why did Intel hype that the Pentium was twice as fast as the 486 with the same clock speed and produce official test data? After the release of Pentium MMx/Pentium II/Pentium III, Intel will also provide performance comparison evaluation data between them and the previous generation of processors. Why did Intel hand in a blank test without official evaluation data when Pentium 4 was released? In fact, it was not until the 2GHz Pentium 4 came out that Intel shyly came up with official test data comparing the performance of the 2GHz Pentium 4 and the 1GHz Pentium III.

Of course, the 2GHz Pentium 4 is naturally better than the 1GHz Pentium III, but does this mean anything? The 486DX4-100MHz processor still beats the Pentium 60MHz processor, because its main frequency is high.

The release of Pentium 4 set a bad precedent: There has never been a next-generation processor with lower performance than the previous generation processor at the same main frequency. Pentium 4 did it; Intel processor development history There has never been a clock frequency outage during the update of mid-range processors, and the Pentium 4 has also done this. The starting operating frequency of Pentium 4 is 1.4GHz (the 1.3GHz Pentium 4 was released a long time ago and is only supplied to brand-name machine manufacturers in limited quantities). The end operating frequency of Pentium III is 1GHz. Who will support the 400MHz frequency break? Fill? This thankless task was left to Tualatin, who was almost stillborn. This is almost the only reason why the desktop version of Tualatin Pentium III comes out. Tualatin Pentium III was born cautiously like an abused child bride. In order to minimize its huge performance advantage over the low-clocked Pentium 4, Intel first castrated half of its L2 cache; at first glance, the performance is still too awesome x , and then lowered the FSB to 133MHz; when I saw that the performance was still too good, I increased the second-level cache delay time to 1; when I saw that it was still too good, I decided to castrate it. I guess I should stop it. If I castrate it again, it would be enough. Got the Cy Young? The development engineer of Tualatin quit, so Intel made another decision on the supporting chipset and canceled the release of the 830 motherboard. Instead, it launched the 815GM chipset integrating the i752 graphics card to match the Tualatin Pentium III... Even so, Tualatin The Pentium III 1.13A GHz still outperformed the Pentium 4 1.5GHz, so Intel took another damaging move by strictly limiting the shipments of Tualatin Pentium III and artificially raising its price to a very high level to encourage brand-name machines. The manufacturer uses Pentium 4 processor. As a result, Tualatin Pentium III is rarely found in the market, and its scarcity is even greater than the server version of Pentium III-S... Climbing from 1GHz to 1.33GHz, Tualatin Pentium III finally completed the filling of two generations of processors The task of having a blank main frequency ended sadly (the Tualatin Pentium III 1.33GHz was the worst, and was discontinued just after its release).

Tualatin Cy Young's fate is much better than that of his eldest brother. This is because Intel needs it to compete with AMD's Dragon (Duron), which inherits Tualatin's excellent performance, 256KB cache (Tualatin Celeron's 256KB cache can compete with Yang D's 256KB cache), 100MHz FSB, plus Using streamlined data pre-reading technology, Tualatin Cy Young has indeed completed the task well. But Tualatin is a double-edged sword, and Intel is beginning to worry about the handover of work between it and Willamette Celeron. What if Tualatin Celeron will crush Willamette Celeron just like Tualatin Pentium III crushed low-clocked Pentium 4? What if he also beats Willamette Cy Young all over the floor looking for JJ? Oh, I forgot, Sai Young was originally a eunuch, without JJ, but Tualatin Sai Young is obviously Wei Xiaobao, a fake eunuch but a real man. Intel couldn't think of a clever solution, so it left the 300MHz main frequency blank for the two Celerons. A layman looked at it and asked me, how come the Celeron 1.4GHz ended up with the Celeron 1.7GHz? What about 1.5/1.6GHz products? The irony is that the Tualatin Celeron 1.4GHz still easily beats the Willamette Celeron 1.7GHz everywhere looking for dildos...

The server version of Tualatin Pentium III-S came out with Intel own difficulties. The performance of Pentium 4 Xeon is poor (it is still beaten by Tualatin Pentium III, let alone challenge Pentium III-S), and the supporting motherboard platform is expensive (1GB Rambus memory, you can calculate the price yourself). The user ignored it, so he took out the Pentium III-S, which is compatible with the existing 815 platform. It has powerful performance and low heat. It is ideal for 1U servers and low-end dual-socket servers. So, let’s use it. So the Pentium III-S came out at a high price.

Let me reveal here that many Tualatin Pentium III-S are not frequency locked... In comparison, the mobile version of Tualatin Pentium III has the best life. As mentioned before, Pentium 4 has the characteristics of high heat generation and high power consumption. It is really difficult to use it as a notebook CPU to drive ducks to shelves and pigs to climb trees. Tualatin Pentium III has the advantages of low heat generation and low power consumption (in fact, Tualatin uses a good heat sink and does not need a fan at all when the chassis is well ventilated), and it also has high performance (Tualatin Pentium III-M can also The mobile version of the Pentium 4, which has a clock speed several hundred MHz higher than mine, was all over the place looking for JJ. However, the mobile version of the processor is too small and you have to use a magnifying glass to find JJ.) It is the most suitable processor for notebooks. Therefore, Intel promoted Tualatin Pentium III-M in a high-profile manner and designed a logo similar to the mobile version of Pentium 4. It hopes to use Tualatin Pentium III-M to occupy a large share of the mainstream mobile processor market. But no matter how good Tualatin is, it is still Pentium III. Didn’t Intel use overwhelming advertising to say that 4 to 3 is better? Why buy a Pentium III instead of a Pentium 4 when buying a laptop? Intel was in trouble, and notebook manufacturers were also in trouble. They had to use the mobile version of Pentium 4 to make mainstream notebooks. The thin and light notebook could not accommodate the mobile version of Pentium 4, so they adopted Tualatin Pentium III. As a result, users complained one after another. Those who bought mainstream notebooks asked the manufacturer, why is the battery life of your latest notebook so much shorter than that of the old Ben3 notebook? Users who have bought thin and light notebooks also blame the manufacturers. They say that thin and light notebooks use the most advanced technology of notebook manufacturers. Why did you sell me a Pentium III notebook that has been eliminated? The manufacturers' complaints from dissatisfied users prompted Intel to find another way and start designing the Pentium M. This Pentium M Centrino platform is actually just a Tualatin Pentium III with a new soup (name), seasoning (SSE2), and two plates of snacks (wireless network card and 855 chipset).

Part 3 Tualatin and Pentium 4, which one has better performance

Before we talk about this problem, let’s make an analogy. What do you think it takes to complete a dunk? The answer is height and jumping ability. A very tall person can dunk with a light jump, but that doesn't mean that a short person can't dunk. Those weightlifters in our country who are about 1.6 meters tall can easily jump up on the spot and perform an inverted dunk without running. Machine developed leg muscles and amazing jumping ability. In the same way, there is not one factor that determines the performance of a processor. There are two main factors, one is the main frequency, and the other is the execution efficiency under the unit main frequency.

Pentium 4 can easily reach the main frequency of 2GHz under the same 0.18 micron process, while Pentium III has reached its limit just after reaching 1.13GHz. Why is this? This is because the Pentium 4's computing pipeline has as many as 20 or even 31 stages, while the Pentium III only has 11 stages. The longer the computing pipeline, the easier it is to achieve a higher operating frequency under the same manufacturing process. Athlon can achieve high clock speeds that are difficult to achieve with Pentium III under the same manufacturing process, because the computing pipeline of Athlon is slightly longer than that of Pentium III. However, if the computing pipeline is too long, it will also have negative effects. The longer the pipeline, the lower the execution efficiency of the processor at the unit main frequency, and the performance will be affected. As we all know, Pentium 4 was able to achieve such a high main frequency due to the lengthened design of the pipeline, and defeated AMD in the main frequency battle, forcing Athlon XP to "dare not show its true colors" (referring to Athlon XP not using The real main frequency is marked, and the main frequency is marked with "equivalent to a Pentium 4"). However, the lengthening of the pipeline will increase the time that data stays in the pipeline, resulting in an increase in the possibility of data errors. Once a data error occurs, the result is that the entire operation step will be repeated, which will cause a reduction in processor processing performance. . This can be improved by relying on an efficient branch prediction system and Cache mechanism, but it is only an "improvement" rather than a "compensation".

To make up for the shortcomings of high frequency and low energy, it is necessary to rely on a higher main frequency to offset it. For example, under the same manufacturing process, the performance of a 2GHz Pentium 4 will always be higher than that of a 1GHz Pentium III. This is achieved without changing the manufacturing process. The performance improvement is just because Intel is unkind and deliberately misleads people into the misunderstanding that "high frequency = high performance" is no longer true since the advent of Pentium 4. As for AMD, even the Athlon 64 has a very short pipeline, so the execution efficiency is very high. The integer pipeline of Athlon 64 reaches 12 stages, and the floating-point pipeline reaches 17 stages. Compared with Athlon XP, it only increases by two stations, but the branch prediction mechanism is greatly improved, so the performance is significantly improved at the same main frequency. From this we can see two fundamentally different ideas in Intel's design of Pentium 4 and AMD's design of Athlon: Intel pursues the main frequency priority and relies on extremely high main frequency to improve performance; AMD pursues efficiency first and relies on efficient execution mechanism to achieve Achieve higher performance at the same main frequency. AMD's approach is actually inherited from Intel's P6 architecture design idea (Pentium III, Pentium M and even Core inherit this design idea).

Understanding the two design principles, and considering the fact that the execution efficiency of Pentium 4 at the unit main frequency is only about Pentium III 70-75, we can easily draw the following conclusion: at the same main frequency , the performance of Pentium III is obviously higher than that of Pentium 4. However, Pentium 4 can achieve a high main frequency that Pentium III cannot achieve under the same manufacturing process. This high main frequency can fully make up for the low performance and is more than enough. If the power consumption and heat generation of the processor are not considered, we can think that both processor design ideas are feasible. But the processor cannot just stay on paper. It must be produced in real form to realize its value. The actual processor must consume electricity and generate heat when working. At this time, it depends on which design idea is more practical and reasonable. problem. The pipeline computing pipeline is not a tiny biological cell tube like the vas deferens or fallopian tube, but is composed of transistors one by one. Obviously, the longer the pipeline computing pipeline, the greater the number of transistors; the greater the number of transistors, the greater the power consumption; the greater the power consumption, the higher the heat generation. This is the vitality of the Pentium 4 processor. Who wants to keep an electric tiger at home?

Part 4 The fatal flaw of Pentium 4, thin and light notebooks rely on Tualatin

Since the advent of Pentium 4, it has experienced three generations of cores. The author's evaluation of these three generations of products is "from failure to success, and then from success to new failure."

The first generation core of Pentium 4 is Willamette, which was released in November 2000. It is manufactured using a 0.18 micron process, has 256KB full-speed L2 cache, and 400MHz FSB. In the two important indicators of integer processing speed and floating point performance, the Willamette Pentium 4 did not have any improvement compared to the Pentium III of the P6 architecture. It was just a stop-gap measure against the Thunderbird Athlon because Intel was not ready for 0.13 at the time. The micron process production line is used to produce Northwood Pentium 4 and Tualatin Pentium III. Fortunately, after the main frequency was increased to 1.7GHz, the Pentium 4 has completely surpassed the Copper Mine Pentium III in performance, which has brought some psychological comfort to Intel. But the most fatal problem of the Willamette Pentium 4 is not its low performance, but its incredibly high power consumption and heat generation. There was an internal source who pointed out that some Intel engineers suggested equipping Willamette with 512MB cache or even L3 cache (later implemented in Gallatin Xeon and Beimu Pentium 4 Extreme Edition) in order to improve Willamette's performance, at least to make it The performance is not inferior to its previous generation product Pentium III. But this suggestion is very unrealistic. Opponents pointed out that if this was really done, the Willamette Pentium 4 would be as big as a brick. This may be a joke, but it also reflects the fact that Willamette Pentium 4 was launched in a hurry.

But Intel's publicity power is getting stronger. Many friends who have newly installed computers have spent thousands of dollars to buy a Willamette Pentium 4 850 motherboard and Rambus memory package, but they never imagined that they would become the innocent scapegoat for Intel's face-saving actions.

The second-generation core Northwood quickly replaced Willamette and became the mainstream of the market because it had ample preparation time and was manufactured using a 0.13 micron process, which better solved the problems of heat generation and power consumption. Since then, with the introduction of new technologies such as 800MHz FSB and hyper-threading, the power of the NetBurst architecture has been fully exerted. Therefore, in terms of performance, Tualatin Pentium III can no longer compete with Northwood Pentium 4. In my own actual use, whether playing games (Q3A) or watching high-definition videos, the Pentium 4 2.8C GHz far exceeds the Pentium III-S 1.4GHz. Even AMD has begun to take a serious look at the Pentium 4 processor, which it has always regarded as an adult toy.

Northwood Pentium 4 can indeed become a classic because it perfectly reproduces the original intention of the Netburst development team. The Netburst architecture uses an extraordinary pipeline computing pipeline. Such a long computing pipeline is naturally prepared for hyper-threading technology. You must know that processors with short pipelines in the P6 architecture like Pentium III/Pentium M/Core cannot implement hyper-threading technology! There are many technical articles about hyperthreading, so I won't go into details here. Northwood's Pentium 4 successor Prescott is a new failure. This failure made Intel finally decide to abandon the Netburst architecture. I wonder what the Netburst development team thought of creating such a monster to consume the limited energy on the earth: it inherits and develops all the shortcomings of the Willamette Pentium 4, and the assembly line is lengthened to 31 levels! Although Prescott Pentium 4 also has advantages (such as SSE3, larger L2 cache and more efficient Hyper-Threading technology), it has too many transistors, so that it generates approximately 100% more transistors per clock cycle than Northwood. 60 calories, while power consumption also increases by about 10! Prescott processors are prone to overheating, and the result of overheating is running at reduced frequencies. Prescott ultimately lost to temperature. Intel must consider whether air cooling can meet Prescott's needs. If water cooling must be used...then let Netburst die. As everyone knows, the final result was that Intel had to completely abandon the Prescott architecture, and its efforts to develop the 4GHz part were considered a waste of internal resources and abandoned. Stopping at 3.8GHz, Intel finally admitted that it was wrong. Don't forget that when Intel released the Pentium 4, it boasted that the Pentium 4 was designed for a computing speed of 10GHz. This must be the most important and perhaps the most well-known engineering failure in Intel's history.

The mobile version of Pentium 4 was born out of the desktop version of Pentium 4. Its fatal flaw is of course power consumption and heat. Almost all netizens on the Internet have laptops. I guess everyone wants their laptops to have a lower temperature and longer battery life, right? The mobile version of Pentium 4 obviously does not meet the requirements of friends.

When it comes to the mobile version of Pentium 4, there are two main categories. The first type is the Mobile Pentium 4-M processor (Mobile Pentium 4 M) released on April 23, 2002, which has SpeedStep and deep sleep technology, but does not support hyper-threading technology and consumes about 35W.

The other type is the Mobile Pentium 4 processor (Mobile Pentium 4). The reason for its release is that efforts to further increase the frequency of the Mobile Pentium 4-M while maintaining low power consumption have proven to be impossible. Mobile Pentium 4 It is just to provide a high-frequency processor for notebooks. Of course, its power consumption is lower than that of the desktop Pentium 4. It has "only" 70W. Isn't it cool? The mobile Pentium 4-M cannot further increase the main frequency, and the power consumption control is also unsatisfactory. The main frequency of the mobile Pentium 4 has been increased, and the power consumption and heat generation are scary... This is the problem facing Intel and notebook manufacturers. Tuatin comes in handy at this time, it has all the advantages a mobile processor needs: low power consumption, low heat and high performance. From a technical design perspective, almost all notebook manufacturers like the Tualatin Pentium III-M. However, from a market perspective, with Intel's overwhelming advertising, promoting Tualatin notebooks is a dead end. After trying the bitter pill of being neglected by the Tualatin Pentium III-M, almost all notebook manufacturers have made the same choice: use the mobile Pentium 4 to design and manufacture general notebooks, and use Tualatin specifically for thin and light portable notebooks. product development. As long as you observe carefully, you will find that notebooks using mobile Pentium 4 processors, regardless of brand, are large, thick, and heavy. Manufacturers with good design can solve the problem of overheating of this type of notebook body, but the battery life is limited. There's no guarantee. You can't equip a big, thick, and heavy notebook with a big, thick, and heavy battery, right? In comparison, the Tualatin Pentium III-M is much better. Laptops using this type of processor are lightweight and portable, have long battery life, and are also powerful in performance. I don't know where Intel's inspiration for designing the Pentium M, which is completely different from desktop processors, came from, but there is no doubt that the Tualatin Pentium III-M is the prototype of the Pentium M.

Part 5: Pentium 4 stopped at 3.8GHz, and Intel found its way back

On October 15, 2004, Intel decided not to launch a 4GHz Pentium 4 processor and stated that it would no longer Clock speed is then used as the main criterion for evaluating chip performance. When announcing the decision, 64-year-old Intel President Craig Barrett said in front of 6,500 people: "Please forgive us." Maybe this cute old man with a humorous temperament is joking, but now he is on his right knee.