Seth_Man Posted April 26, 2004 Posted April 26, 2004 http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc....-116-178&depa=1 2.4A, 533 FSB, 1MB cache, Prescott, $129, what the heck is going on here? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paranoid Posted April 26, 2004 Posted April 26, 2004 That's the low-end Prescott... It's supposed to be a very good overclocking chip. I think it's been out for about a month now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ph33rh4x Posted April 26, 2004 Posted April 26, 2004 a 2.4A with the prescott core... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mist Posted April 26, 2004 Posted April 26, 2004 odd I thought *northwoods* a was a 400 fsb so it is strange they would call a prescott with a 533 an a. Hmm me ponders this though I would stay away from prescotts as they are not mature yet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OweO2004 Posted April 26, 2004 Posted April 26, 2004 sounds weird i spose its a northwood 'b' on a 90nm process n 1mb or cache. However cos the prescott is designed for high clock speeds a low clocked one would be crap! Would be a brilliant ocer thou! people get the 2.8 to 4/4.2 so this would go to 3.2/3.4! not bad for the price! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtry51 Posted April 26, 2004 Posted April 26, 2004 (edited) Yeah, as if it weren't confusing enough for people already. I don't see any reason why they had to use the 'A' designation over again. The 'A' designation was supposed to be reserved for 400fsb cpus. The 'B' designation was used for 533s, yet they release this 533 with the 'A'? Not excactly sure what they were thinking, if it is just a 2.4 533, then it should be a 2.4B prescott, but it has 1MB cache, so it should reallt get it's own letter. They should have just labeled it 'D' or 'F'. Stupid companies and their illogical numbering schemes. And why they even botherred to make this chip I cannot fathom. The 2.4C is already a tremendous overclocker and the prescott puts out way too much heat for companies like dell, who use minimal cooling, to use it. On top of that your going BACKWARDS in clock speed and performance. The prescotts show absolutely no significant increase in performance over northwoods. StupidStupidStupid. They could've taken the money they spent making that crap chip and invested it in solving the heat problem. The prescotts are a complete flop until they either start producing less heat than the northwood 'C's or get to higher speeds, neither of which has happened yet. Wait, wait, I've got a great idea.. Let's build a completely inferior product to one we already make and sell it for more! Yes, that's a super idea. If AMD didn't have their headsup their #@#es, they would be pounding out chips and dropping prices to grab hold of this oppurtunity. But that would be smart business practice, so let's not do that... Edited April 26, 2004 by xtry51 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seth_Man Posted April 26, 2004 Posted April 26, 2004 it think my head is gonna pop Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syromieshi Posted April 27, 2004 Posted April 27, 2004 Paranoid Posted on Apr 25 2004, 06:56 PM That's the low-end Prescott... It's supposed to be a very good overclocking chip. I think it's been out for about a month now. with adequate cooling Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanATIc205 Posted April 27, 2004 Posted April 27, 2004 these are probally cpu's that had problems running the higher speeds with ht enabled or some other problem. so instead of losing money on wasted silicon intel is just trying to stay profitable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now