Duke, Re: "It was hard to resist being glib and titling this article, "Much Ado about Very Little". That feeling of disappointment comes from seeing so much new technology introduced all at once, and then finding out the real performance benefit is extremely small"
I am a bit disappointed in the PCIe graphics performance. DDR2 is understandable, since it will take some time for the DRAM vendors to optimize timings and for Intel to release a 1066MT/s FSB. However, the article makes a good point that this technology isn't here yet, and that makes a 925X chipset uncompelling to say the least.
I also find this line a bit embarrassing:
Re: We also clearly saw in our performance tests that a current Intel 875 motherboard, running fast DDR memory and a Northwood processor, was just as fast as a 925X running a Prescott at the same speed. This is not really a failing on the part of the new chipsets, though, as it indicates real progress in Prescott development. When Prescott was first introduced, it was a much poorer performer than Northwood. The fact that it is now competitive with Northwood using all these new technologies indicates a lot of progress has been made.
Basically, this is like saying Prescott was a big disappointment, but on the bright side, hundreds of millions in R&D effort for new and revolutionary platform features has brought it to about performance parity with the previous generation. Whoop-de-do.
The more I think about it, Intel has really screwed up their main business with the Prescott core, and not even some very good platform design can save it. I have a feeling that the transition to dual core will be even more disappointing, given that AMD has a huge power advantage here, and things will continue to be dull until Intel gets a mobile core with 64-bits for the desktop. Hopefully for them, that is job #1 over there, or else they deserve to lose their lunch to AMD.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
