Intel Prescott reviewed

User Comments: 4

1. February 2, 2004 6:06 PM
   Didou said:
   I think the lack of big "tangible" improvement this early in its evolution explains why they kept the P4 name.& at the same time it might explain the general disinterest in this CPU ( allthough they are pretty cheap ).
   Reply
2. February 3, 2004 12:19 AM
   Julio said:
   Same as when the Pentium 4 was introduced... in the long term the improvements will become more obvious performance-wise and at the same time Intel is securing they will be able to grow using the same technology for a period of time.
   Reply
3. February 3, 2004 4:09 AM
   Didou said:
   Well that remains to be seen, but it is still obvious that they did not put as much promotion on this as they did for the initial P4 ( willamette ).I mean when it came out, you saw blue guys everywhere, trying to make you think the P4 would make the net go faster instantly turning your 56K into a DSL modem & such ( yes Intel, sure :rolleyes: ).I think they're trying to keep the yahmill technology incognito for now. I guess it's hard to have to resort to using a competitor's technology especially when they have far less invested in R&D then you.& did anyone say LaGrande ? *cough*Palladium*cough*I'm very curious as to what will be show at the next IDF.
   Reply
4. February 3, 2004 1:16 PM
   Julio said:
   Prescott was hyped a lot by the media (including us, if you want) since initial plans were for it to become the "Pentium 5" or whatever you want to call it.
   Reply

Recently commented stories