Intel Announces Coppermine

All AMD needs is the Tyan motherboards that run on a 133MHz FSB, then you can bench the coppermine and the Athlon on even grounds...

#36, the way I understand it, the older P3 L2 cache runs at half the processor speed and the newer coppermine P3\'s run the L2 cache at full processor speed. Add to this the faster bus speed and memory speed and performance is increased even further.

I don\'t want to do the math but the new coppermine is better all the way around. Check this link for more info: http://www.aceshardware.com/Spades/read.php?article_id=84

P.S. I stole that link from Steve.

Your all nerds! I\'m a geek. So I win.

Ah, thanx #35. I had a sneaking suspicion that I didnt have all the facts about
external cache\' performance. I was going on info I knew about 100 mhz fsb P2\'s
and P3\'s.
So lemme get this straight. The actual external cache\' speed is the same
on the P3 450 as the P3 733?

I do recall that the P2 @ P3 450 external cache\' runs at 1/2 speed on
a 100 mhz fsb.

If that is true, then the external cache\' on P3\'s has a rapidly dimminishing cache\' efficency.

#34, the bus speed is actually 133.3333...etc so the real processor speed is 733 and 1/3 MHz.

These are the specs, the actual bus speeds can flucuate(up or down) as anyone that has run CPUID on their processor can tell you.

#31, I have a 100MHz bus Celeron! Well, actually 103.1MHz with the turbo...

Anyone notice that \"Advanced Cache\' Transfer\" for the \'on die\' chips?
The claim is that it is 3times faster than the regular cache\'. That is
true to 2 times as fast since it runs at full clock speed and the P3 regular cache runs at 1/2 speed. Well, lets consider what overclocking does for \'on die\' cache\'. Since it is at full clock speed, then the cache\' runs at the same speed at the cpu. Sooooo, the question is,
\"Did Intel overclock a PIII with \'on die\' cache?\" Or did Intel reduce the regular P3 cache\' to 1/3 cpu speed? : which is highly unlikely.

A PIII @550 on 100 mhz board with on die cache.
5.50 X 133 = 732
5.51 X 133 = 733 mhz.
Ya, i know, there is no 5.51 multiplyer, but maybe Intel fugded the numbers a little. ;)

Now. Going from 550/733 mhz gives a incr speed factor to the cache of .75. i.e. 550/733=.75 So if Intel rounds 2.75 to 3, then the cache would be 3 times faster than ordinary cache.

The claim of 3x faster and not 2x is a strong indication that the chip is overclocked. Whether they used the P3 550 or a diff combination of (multiplyer x board mhz) is certainly an open question.

Notice how Intel\'s had the 66,166,266 ... and now a 667. Heh. Damn! No P3-666 for me.

#28, see that big update added? the story has been updated so it moves closer to the front of the line.

WTF?? Why does intel need 15 CPUs to get from 600MHz to 733? AMD did it in three: 600, 650, 700.

I am that rabbit.

The Coppermine L2 cache - a quick short-term memory on the chip itself - is not only larger than that in previous Pentium IIIs but also runs at the full speed of the chip, rather than half-speed as before.

That\'s a direct quote from the article. Would someone like to tell me how 256k L2 cache (Coppermine) is bigger than 512k (Katmai)? Idiots...

You go bLeech!!!

I\'m gonna get dat wabbit

I like bunnies with big ummm!?..... ears.

very true, very true

unless TERATOGEN doesnt like you, then, I think hes referring to that big pink rabbit...

Hey bLeech, neither does the author.

I think he\'s sayin you blew it, cuz you posted, and then realized ya got the first post... too little... too late

hey TERATOGEN, its obvious #7 has no clue what is going on.

#7 huh?

yeah he did.

Ya think that these bastards at Intel might think about lowering their prices a bit? I mean, c\'mon, they\'re losing big shit to AMD, and their processors are still expensive as hell...

#3 you blew it big time LOL