There has been much debate about which high-end processor is the best purchase in today's highly competitive market, both performance-wise and value-wise. There are two current main competitors in this market, AMD and Intel. Some prefer AMD processors because they offer excellent value for money, while others prefer Intel processors, due to their high performance and comparatively low heat output. There have been countless times, whether it be in an online forum or chatroom where I have witnessed quite heated debates about which company is currently at the top of the desktop processor market and whether or not things will change in the near future.
A Look In to The Future
- AMD
As far as high-end processors go, in Quarter 2 of 2002 AMD plans to move to a 0.13-micron chip with their 2200+ (1.8GHz) and 2000+ (1.66GHz) AthlonXP Thoroughbred processors. Then somewhere in the second half of 2002 they plan to upgrade the AthlonXP to the Barton core which bumps the processor from 256K to 512K L2 cache. Both the Thoroughbred and the Barton will have a 133MHz FSB, however, there are rumors that AMD are thinking of bumping it up to 166MHz. This, however, is quite unlikely and all signs are currently pointing to both the Thoroughbread and the Barton having a 133MHz FSB.
In the early part of 2003, AMD will be releasing their 64-bit processor, the ClawHammer which will be a 0.13-micron part and in the second half of 2003 they will be shrinking the ClawHammer to a 0.09-micron die. Final specifications about the ClawHammer are yet to be confirmed, however, we know it will be a 64-bit part and feature HyperTransport and AGP3.0.
In the value segment, AMD plan to keep the Duron on the Palomino core till Quarter 3 of 2002 , when they will be releasing their Appaloosa core that not only shrinks the die to 0.13, but also bumps the FSB up to 133MHz (266MHz DDR).
- Intel
In the high-end segment, Intel plans on bumping their current Pentium 4 Northwood core up to an FSB of 533MHz with 512K L2 cache in the second quarter of 2002. By Quarter 3 they will have their 2.53GHz Pentium 4 processor out which features the same 533MHz FSB and 512KB cache.
As far as the value market is concerned, Intel plans on moving their Celeron to the Pentium 4 core with a 400MHz FSB by Quarter 4. Intel plans to have moved all of their Celerons from the Pentium III core to the Pentium 4 core by Quarter 4.
- Making Sense of it all
As you can see from the information given above, Intel are moving straight to a 533MHz FSB and 512KB L2 cache, while AMD will most probably still have 133MHz (266MHz DDR) FSB processors till at least the early part of 2003. Even with the release of the ClawHammer in Quarter 1 of 2003, we don't know how it will stand up against the competition from Intel since it is based on a whole new architecture. While shrinking the die will enable both companies to release faster processors that produce less heat, that's about where it ends as far as AMD is concerned. The Pentium 4 will be able to benefit from faster memory while AMD's Athlon range will still be bottlenecked by its slow front side bus.
Conclusion
Are you beginning to see the trend here? The Athlon's bus cannot take advantage of some very important, new technologies and it just makes me wonder how things will change once manufacturers start releasing DDR400, dual-channel chipsets for the Pentium 4. Even today we are seeing Intel's current fastest processor, the Pentium 4 2.4GHz outperform AMD's fastest processor, the AthlonXP 2100+ (1.73GHz) by a significant margin. Going by this fact and the facts stated earlier in the article, it is logical to say that by moving the Pentium 4 to a 533MHz FSB and giving it faster memory, Intel will only be increasing their performance lead even further.
That said, at the moment it is clear to see who the leader of the high-end processor market is as far as value for money is concerned. AMD's AthlonXP processor provides performance that surpasses that of the Pentium 4 clock-for-clock and it is also priced much cheaper.
What does this all mean? Well, until now, AMD's AthlonXP has been the undisputed leader of the desktop market, offering higher performance than the Pentium 4 and also being sold at a cheaper price. However, things are finally starting to change, with Intel stealing the performance crown from AMD and not looking like it is going to hand it back any time soon. With the Pentium 4 dropping in price every month, AMD seems to be running out of cards to play unless they manage to pull off something special and steal the performance crown back from Intel.
Could this be the end of AMD's reign as the king of the high-end desktop processor market? Are AMD going to be left behind and in the end, regarded as a value processor? As you would have already figured out from the tone of this article, I think so. It's just a matter of waiting to see if chipset manufacturers decide to release a dual-channel, DDR400 chipset for the Pentium 4, and if Intel can manage to competitively price their future processors.
Intel Celeron 1300: Tualatin Core and 0.13 Micron
The launch of Intel's latest Celeron, which can now be had with a maximum clock speed of 1300 MHz, takes its battle with AMD to the next level. The Celeron 1300 is set to go head-to-head with the AMD Duron 1200, which is geared toward the same market segment. But the Celeron 1300, based on the Tualatin core, performs very sluggishly. The reason being that, with the front-side bus and memory clock limited to 100 MHz, it's hard to tweak the performance any more, no matter how high Intel may increase the clock speed. Or, to put it more bluntly, modern CPU meets obsolete platform. Plans to develop the latter further have long since been shelved by Intel.
The Intel Celeron 1300 is basically nothing more than a Pentium III with a 100 MHz ceiling imposed on its FSB clock speed. This measure was considered necessary by the chip monopoly's marketing gurus to ensure that there was enough distance between it and the Pentium 4.
Another feature that holds back the Celeron with the Tualatin core is the requirement that it be used in conjunction with conventional SDRAM, which puts yet another dent in the Celeron's performance. The Celeron would only be able to really show what it is capable of if DDR-SDRAM and an FSB clock speed of 133 MHz were available. However, our attempts to overclock the FSB clearly showed that anything above the 120 MHz limit spells stability trouble.
In all other respects, the Celeron uses state-of-the-art technology. The 0.13 micron fabrication behind it ensures that even a standard fan will keep the CPU icy, even when its voltage has been set to 1.50 V. There is one caveat, which we already mentioned in our article on the Celeron 1200. If you own an old board with an Intel 815EP chipset, you can forget using any new CPU with a Tualatin core.
