there is a 3.2 GHz Extreme Edition, as well as 3.4 GHz Prescott and a 3.4 GHz Extreme Edition. The last 2 are the fastest "official" CPUs for the platform. You can use a 479 to 478 adaptor to run some mobile CPUs which are pretty fast.

slivercr wrote:

there is a 3.2 GHz Extreme Edition, as well as 3.4 GHz Prescott and a 3.4 GHz Extreme Edition. The last 2 are the fastest "official" CPUs for the platform. You can use a 479 to 478 adaptor to run some mobile CPUs which are pretty fast.

Interesting, I didn't know about this adapter. What did change on the Extreme Editions?

386SX wrote:

slivercr wrote:

there is a 3.2 GHz Extreme Edition, as well as 3.4 GHz Prescott and a 3.4 GHz Extreme Edition. The last 2 are the fastest "official" CPUs for the platform. You can use a 479 to 478 adaptor to run some mobile CPUs which are pretty fast.

Interesting, I didn't know about this adapter. What did change on the Extreme Editions?

The Extreme Editions had 2MB of L3 cache besides the 512kB L2. Pretty hard to find any these days though in my experience.

Dani-01 wrote:

386SX wrote:

slivercr wrote:

there is a 3.2 GHz Extreme Edition, as well as 3.4 GHz Prescott and a 3.4 GHz Extreme Edition. The last 2 are the fastest "official" CPUs for the platform. You can use a 479 to 478 adaptor to run some mobile CPUs which are pretty fast.

Interesting, I didn't know about this adapter. What did change on the Extreme Editions?

The Extreme Editions had 2MB of L3 cache besides the 512kB L2. Pretty hard to find any these days though in my experience.

Interesting, I read anyway with the older core and without SSE3. Were they faster then the equal 1MB L2 and SSE3 Prescott?

Benchmarks from the time of release largely showed the Northwood (512KB) being faster than the Prescott. However, I don't know if that's true with later software. I have found that the Prescott is faster at H.264 video decoding. It could also be faster at later games that may be more tailored for the Prescott.
So the question of which is faster probably needs to be qualified by what the killer app is.

Even where the Prescott is faster, maybe the "Extreme Edition" versions of the Northwood make up the difference. I've never tested one of those, just plain Northwoods.

Prescotts are hard on motherboard VRMs. Not sure about the EE Northwood.

shamino wrote:

Benchmarks from the time of release largely showed the Northwood (512KB) being faster than the Prescott. However, I don't know […]
Show full quote

Benchmarks from the time of release largely showed the Northwood (512KB) being faster than the Prescott. However, I don't know if that's true with later software. I have found that the Prescott is faster at H.264 video decoding. It could also be faster at later games that may be more tailored for the Prescott.
So the question of which is faster probably needs to be qualified by what the killer app is.

Even where the Prescott is faster, maybe the "Extreme Edition" versions of the Northwood make up the difference. I've never tested one of those, just plain Northwoods.

Prescotts are hard on motherboard VRMs. Not sure about the EE Northwood.

Thanks. Never tried P4 cpus back in those times, always have been an Athlon XP fan but they seems quiet fast in the os usage, also with last Linux versions. I really like the 775 versions of these cpu. I've the 3,2Ghz 512Kbyte 800Mhz SL6WG version of the Northwood maybe I will test it.

shamino wrote:

Prescotts are hard on motherboard VRMs. Not sure about the EE Northwood.

Well, wikipedia lists them as 92,1W for the 3,2GHz one and 102,9W for the 3,4GHz version. I'm guessing the Gallatin is somewhere between Northwood and Prescott. Closer to the Prescott maybe.

Dani-01 wrote:

shamino wrote:

Prescotts are hard on motherboard VRMs. Not sure about the EE Northwood.

Well, wikipedia lists them as 92,1W for the 3,2GHz one and 102,9W for the 3,4GHz version. I'm guessing the Gallatin is somewhere between Northwood and Prescott. Closer to the Prescott maybe.

They're harder on VRM because Prescott is lower voltage, thus needing higher current.

Northwood v Precott is a mixed bag. For in-era gaming, Northwood is ahead most of the times (say 75/25 split). In Comanche 4, Northwood 3.4 > Prescott 3.4 by 20%! For SpecViewPerf, Prescott is ahead by comfy margins. It all depends on if the application wants a smaller, faster cache with shorter pipelines vs a larger slower cache with longer pipelines.

Of course the Extreme Edition is way ahead in most cases.

http://techreport.com/review/6459/intel-penti … hz-processors/5

The extreme edition uses the Gallatin core as previously mentioned with L3 cache. But I'd like to add the core is the same as that generation of Xeon.

dexvx wrote:

Dani-01 wrote:

shamino wrote:

Prescotts are hard on motherboard VRMs. Not sure about the EE Northwood.

Well, wikipedia lists them as 92,1W for the 3,2GHz one and 102,9W for the 3,4GHz version. I'm guessing the Gallatin is somewhere between Northwood and Prescott. Closer to the Prescott maybe.

They're harder on VRM because Prescott is lower voltage, thus needing higher current.

Oh, my mistake then. Wrote that when I was pretty tired. 🤣
The voltages are 1,55 and 1,575 respectively, so they should be like regular Northwoods.

As for Northwood vs Prescott, I did try a 3,06GHz Northwood HT (533) and a 3,4GHz Prescott HT (800) not long ago. The Northwood was right up there (or at least close) in older games despite the lower FSB, while the Prescott was noticably faster in much newer games (like Serious Sam HD and GRID), but you wouldn't want to play those on a P4 anyway unless you're looking for how low can you go. 🤣