Intel's 925X & LGA-775: Are Prescott 3.6 and PCI Express Graphics any Faster?
by Anand Lal Shimpi on June 21, 2004 12:05 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Final Words
We split this article into two sections, basically focusing on the performance of the new Pentium 4 560 (3.6GHz) as well as the performance impact of using PCI Express graphics, so we will conclude the article accordingly.The Pentium 4 560 manages to offer performance better than that of Intel's fastest Extreme Edition P4, thanks to the additional 200MHz clock increase. The performance enhancement has nothing to do with any architectural changes, as there are none, but everything to do with clock speed. If Intel wants to continue to uphold that their Extreme Edition brand is truly extreme, then a higher frequency core is necessary.
Intel's move to the LGA-775 socket leaves a somewhat foul taste in our mouth, although we do understand the engineering need for such a move. The fragility of the socket requires us to caution our loyal readers once again. Remember that it's quite easy to damage these pins, so don't rush your CPU installation. Intel quotes the mean time between failures of the new LGA-775 socket at around 20 insertions, which they claim is similar to the current Socket-478 interface; only time will tell how reliable these things really are.
With this article, we were also trying to put an end to the ATI vs. NVIDIA PCI Express debate. Our conclusion? The debate was much ado about nothing - both solutions basically perform the same. ATI's native PCI Express offering does nothing to benefit performance and NVIDIA's bridged solution does nothing to hamper performance. The poor showing of NVIDIA under Far Cry and Warcraft III is some cause for concern, which we will be looking into going forward. We will keep you all updated on any and all findings with regards to that issue as we come across them.
Be sure to read our chipset coverage of the new 925X and 915 platforms and stay tuned for more coverage later this week, including integrated graphics performance and an investigation of the impacts of Native Command Queuing support on disk performance.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
39 Comments
View All Comments
Pete - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
*Sweet.I'm thinking those 6800U benches are probably input errors on AT's part, as most other sites show:
1) scores nowhere near that high, especially at that res, &
2) A64s outperforming P4s.
You may be using a very GPU-limited, or at least not-CPU-limited demo, though.
Pete - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
Swet, fancy Moses! Anand, can you explain the ginormous "vanilla" Far Cry gains by the 6800U? Was IQ the same as the 61.11s (still "point-filtery" in some places compared to ATi) with such prodigious (70%!) gains?justly - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
AnandI don’t care if that info is strait from Intel or not, it is plain wrong, and I think you are wrong for not questioning this and more so by putting it in print.
Conduction is increased with pressure (be it heat or electrical) but for downward force to affect electrical contact/conduction of a CPU in a socket the pins would have to make contact at their tip. A ZIF socket does not do this, it makes contact on the side of the pins when a sliding plate forces the pin against a contact. If contact was made at the tip of the pins then the CPU would not lay flat against the top of the socket when inserted. This would also prevent aftermarket adapters like this one from powerleap http://www.powerleap.com/PL-iP4.html from being used between the CPU and the socket because it would prevent the pins from contacting.
Once the CPU is inserted into the socket and the lever is locked down the CPU is locked flat against the socket so even if downward pressure was applied it would only help with heat transfer.
Runamile - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
I agree with #4. The ZIF socket takes care of all contact needed. And as #15 said, there is a sideways force that makes contact with the pins. Ever seen that Tom's Hardware video with the PIII and P4 running w/o a heatsink, albeit very slowly due to freak overheating? They did 'need' the extreame downwards force. Thats all for heat transfer. Period.All in all, very enlightening article. Basicly shows that the entire 925X/LGA-775/Prescott/DDR2/PCI-X release is a mediocre waste of our money. At least for the time being.
paulvds - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
478 pin electrical contact is by a pinchingsideway force on the pins produced by the ZIF
lever, top down force is totaly irrelevant!
How could you gobble-up that marketing nonsense ?
You advise 'business users' to chose AMD...
Also total nonsense, any entry level value processor will do, they don't need teraMips...
You should go write poetry or novells...
danidentity - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
Great article Anand...Do you have any info on the supposed Intel-imposed 10% overclocking limit described in Tom's Hardware Guide's LGA775 article here?
http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20040619/s...
retrospooty - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
Nice article...It just basically proves what we have all suspected all along. DDR2, PCI express, and socket 775 dont offer any compelling reason to upgrade (for now anyhow).
Of course in the future (maybe 2005 if we're lucky), when graphics cards can utilize the extra bandwidth of PCI express it will be faster than AGP 8x.
Of course in the future (maybe 2005 if we're lucky), when DDR2 800 mhz is standard, it will be faster than low latency DDR400
Of course in the future (even if hell freezes over) the message is clear socket 775 has failed :D
LOL !
T8000 - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
I think the pins in the LGA775 socket are a lot longer then the CPU needs.So adding some kind of non conductive shim around the pins could make this socket a lot more reliable.
It could be as simple as a thin plastic plate with 775 holes in it, that could be inserted before the CPU, leaving just enough pin length to mount the CPU, without the risk of bending those pins.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
phobsThanks for the heads up, we added the last two pages of benchmarks after the fact and I forgot to remove that line :)
Take care,
Anand
Anand Lal Shimpi - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
justlyThat information is straight from Intel - the force of the heatsink was used to maximize heat transfer, but not that much force is necessary to maximize heat transfer. The rest of the force is needed to ensure that there is good contact between the pins and their contacts.
Take care,
Anand