Why is there no Pentium 5 ?

Why is there no Pentium 5 ?

Other urls found in this thread:

anandtech.com/show/386
youtube.com/watch?v=_Vrh3WoATzw
youtube.com/watch?v=MK0hU0OYvCI
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Because over time, flagships are downgraded to lower-end status. Simialar to how the LX trim of a car might have been super-premium 20 years ago, but now it's the base model. The same thing happens in computing, where the Pentium was Intel's flagship and now it's the entry-mid-level model.

Why is there no 80786?

The P4 was a let down for the majority of its day. And they needed a catchy name for the dual/quadcore chips. So no P5.

they couldn't say pentium 3, the sequel, because then it wouldn't sell.

on top of that, the i series has been their ultimate marketing tool. Basically copying BMW

The Pentium 1 to 3 dominated everything. Pentium 4 not so much. Simple as that. The name lost a lot of its power.

Because numbers cannot be trademarked.

oh yeah I forgot about that

You're retconning history
PII was an unimpressive sequel, and the Athlon kicked PIII ass.

>PII was an unimpressive sequel, and the Athlon kicked PIII ass.

It did

That time athlon was hot as hell..

it really didn't

anandtech.com/show/386
The Athlon dominated the PIII

Thunderbird and the pencil trick.
Everyone was overclocking.

Until you removed the heatsink, at which point the Athlon cooked itself. youtube.com/watch?v=_Vrh3WoATzw

nah, its that the pentium 4 was such a fucking piece of shit it stained the branding, kind of like how fx got stained by the bulldozer series.

pentium got brought back when enough time was inbetween it but they would never make that the flagship name again.

youtube.com/watch?v=MK0hU0OYvCI
Intel shills btfo

Refer to the post below yours.

Boo hoo it was a bit hotter, who cares?

>anandtech.com/show/386
Check the underage retard compare a 700mhz cpu to a 600nhz.

then dont fucking remove it? also all cpus did this at some point as they did not have the protections to make it near retard proof for quite a while.

it wasn't hotter, it didn't have a thermal shutoff point

>Athlon kicked PIII ass.

>underage
I'm older than you and remember lusting after those CPUs you retarded kid.

It was hotter though.
Later socket A motherboards had a shut-off tempeature.

Once again, it fucking did.
You may not like it but it dominated, it broke the 1GHz barrier first too since Intel had to recall their Pentiums.

>Because over time, flagships are downgraded to lower-end status
When will this happen for GeForce and Radeon? They have been using the fucking brand for almost 20 years now, disgusting.

>t. Buttmad PIII owner

Intel's buttblasting runs long and deep

>I'm older than you
K, champ
K

Because the Pentium 4 design was thrown out

its like saying the fucking atari jaguar dominated over the snes

>PII was an unimpressive sequel
>100Mhz FSB and SDRAM
>Twice as powerful as Pentium MMX at the same frequency
>Absolute king in floating point performance
>Absolutely trashed the K6-2 and K6-3 in most uses
>Elegant cartridge design

Look at the god damn benchmarks ffs, Athlon was faster at the same clock speeds AND it was offered at higher clock speeds.
Not my fault you got jewed by Intel

Clock for clock it wasn't that much faster than a Pentium MMX
>Absolutely trashed the K6-2 and K6-3 in most uses
Wew lad it was better than budget CPUs good job Intel

>its like saying the fucking atari jaguar dominated over the snes

reply:
>Look at the god damn benchmarks ffs

godfucking dammit

ITT oldfag shills

just like old times.

Intel kiddies I swear...

>P5
Possibly also because "Pentium 5" is too easy to abbreviate to "P5" which already refers to a 1995 chip.

...

>Boo hoo it was a bit hotter, who cares?
On a P4, if the heatsink mount breaks and the HSF falls off, even under heavy load, the CPU detects the rising temperatures and throttles to super slow. It survives, doesn't even bluescreen the OS, and even resumes full speed immediately if a heatsink is stuck back onto it.

An Athlon from that era dies and starts smoking if the heatsink is removed. It had a thermal sensor, but it wasn't built into the die itself, so by the time the higher heat reached it the CPU was already dead.

That thing was a hot mess

Looks like a toilet kek

>VR

lmao it was a fad back then too

You said PIII dominated, I showed you that it didn't, you then pivoted to it being hot, and now you're posting 90s consoles, what the fuck are you doing exactly?

Nice hypothetical scenario you've got there, meanwhile you probably have a half a kilo cooler that will rip off your motherboard if you knocked your case over.

i'm not the hot guy, but if you say dominated you imply that sales were higher than the pentium , and i'm pretty fucking sure PIII outsold the Athlon.
I posted the jaguar because their marketing campaign was what you are doing right know, that is focusing on benchmarks and technical details.

Slotted Athlons were great on paper but from a purely technological perspective they were kind of lackluster barring the very first of them that were going up against the crusty old Katmai Pentium 2.5, even then, as your own benchmarks you posted show, clock-for-clock it's hardly a blowout. ~15% at best.

With the real Pentium III (Coppermine) this was even less competitive, the models breaking the 1 GHz barrier were pure PR trash running slower than shit 333 MHz cache to get there, and they had no SMP support for actually high-end systems. The 1 GHz Coppermine chips, if you could actually get them, would handily outperform any first-generation slotted Athlon with ease.

Whatever goalpost-moving good goy Tom had to do to hand Intel the "win." Just like today...

Netburst made the brand synonymous with shit so they rebranded.
Same reason amd will never call anything good FX again.

...

>pentium outsold the athlon
the athlons sold 10 athlons for every one pentium in retail, intel virtually didn't exist in retail form, intel only survived on prebuilds and OEM contracts

For a processor, benchmarks are all that matter. You can't compare it to a game console.

>intel only survived on prebuilds and OEM contracts

[spoiler]Which they secured using anti-competitive tactics.[/spoiler]

>you imply that sales were higher than the pentium
Where are you getting that implication from?

Reminder that he recommended the Nvidia FX 5600 as the best mid range card back in 2004 or whenever that was

>With the real Pentium III
Holy shit I'm laughing my ass of over here

>intel only survived on prebuilds and OEM contracts
You say that as if it's the smaller market.
Intel made a lot of shady deals to force companies to only sell systems with just Intel CPUs for a long time.

too bad dealing with an athlon was a fucking nightmare compared to dealing with a pentium 3, thats why i compared it to the jaguar: great specs on the paper but thats all.

That is the first post I've made in this thread, I'm not backpedaling on anything, merely presenting my own perspective on the argument.
Katmai pretty much just a Pentium II SSE with no other significant changes or enhancements. Coppermine was the "real" Pentium III in the sense that it actually represented a significant technical step forward, mostly with its on-die secondary cache.

well GTX has replaced geforce as the naming for high end cards.

Athlon shit all over the Pentium 3. The bus speed was twice as fast (200/266/333mhz) and the Athlons had DDR access while P3 was stuck on PC133 sdram with 100/133mhz fsb. The Athlons were cheaper too.

>too bad dealing with an athlon was a fucking nightmare

What the fuck is that even supposed to mean?

The early Athlons used regular non-DDR SDRAM just like most other systems of that period, the DDR part only applied to the bus design which is how they hit that 200 MHz figure.

Literally jews.

Pentium M is the 5.

Core Duo is essentially a Pentium M multi core. i7 is essentially a monolithic Core Duo with HT.

Pentium M is derived from the Pentium Pro. Netburst is different. I imagine Intel got rid of the naming scheme, because P4 overheated notebooks and got a lot of flack.

Well, the GeForce x80 cards were the best ones Nvidia could make.

Then came Ti, and now Titan.

x80's are now the 3rd best of a generation.

I don't even like the i naming. You have to look at the actual specified cache, core, and thread counts.

They're all GeForce, except like Quadro and Tesla. All the general consumer and gaming cards, really.
GeForce GT 210
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti

both intel and amd retired brand names to the backbench once they were tainted with shit products, which is why pentiums are low end garbage and athlons, fx's and opterons are no longer even heard of.

Know what's worse? Celerons still exist

Athlon was still around during the Phenom period though. Athlon was just an old name, there was nothing ever wrong with it.

Now that Turion garbage on the otherhand...

>Kiddie detected

Pentium 2 was a customer-tier version of Pentium Pro with higher clockspeeds. Nothing in the x86 world could touch it. Celeron As were actually faster thanks to their on-die cache and could effortless be overclock to 100FSB on any decent Slot 1 board.

Pentium 3 Katmai was the rather unimpressive sequel since it was just a Pentium 2 with SSE (which wsn't really used heavily until the mid-2000s).

>Athlon was just an old name, there was nothing ever wrong with it.

except that it was used in phenoms, which were slower than the core, and then in bulldozer apus which were landfill.

that said amd *may* revive athlons at a later date but fx and opteron are history.

Pentium 2 (P6) was faster than Pentium MMX (P5) at equal clocks with 32-bit applications and had much higher clockspeed ceiling (233Mhz versus 450Mhz).

P5 and P6 were only equal at legacy 16-bit shit.

P4 was disgraced by the Athlon dual core. Inteljew won't revisit that by continuing to use the Pentium brand name.

You compare CPUs by pricepoint, user. Not by frequency.

>removing the heatsink

Opteron 165 crowd in the house?

Because the Pentium 4 was so bad it ruined the brand.

Reminder that Pentium IIs and IIIs are affected by Meltdown.

>be prepared for a spectacular light show

My body is ready

not to mention that if you spat on the head spreader you'd have less chance of shorting anything compared to an open die athlon

athlon kept fucking up somehow with windows while pentium was more stable.
no idea about other os since i was like 12 at that time

Either your system with the athlon was bloated/fucked with some other point or you had a faulty chip.

>850 millions pixels-per-inch rendering speed
>The raw power of 64-bit technology that CD-quality stereo sound
gotta love that """64bit""" quality advertising

...

What about Presler/Smithfield XE?

There were some 64bit components in it, but it was an absolute mess, full of useless registers, bugs and quirky timing bullshit.

Athlon was in fact higher performance than PIII but they were also extremely hot and power hungry which is why every server operator got a boner for Pentium III S 1.4ghz Tualatins instead.

The Tualatin also overhauled cache performance so it might have performed nearer to the Athlon per clock anyway.

...

This was because Intel had good chipsets generally while AMD was half somewhat good, half utter shit. VIA and SiS were responsible for an awful lot of BSODs back in the day with their shitty chipsets.

Why is there no Core i10?

...

Tualatin was a beast and shit at the same time.

I had an old 440BX chipset motherboard that started with a pentium 3 600 and ended with a tualatin overclocked from 1.2ghz to 1.7ghz with a socket adapter. CPU wise it shit on everything but the SDRAM and FSB at 140mhz murdered it.

Yes the FSB is a massive fucking bottleneck. Fuck Intel I am still mad.

To be fair the Tualatin does have one other weakness, for gaming anyway, - the whole P3 line has fairly mediocre SSE performance. That's the one area where P4 was a major improvement.

>AMDrones exposed as underages and getting completely BTFO ITT
priceless

> tfw no Cyrix quad-core equivalent to power my IBM Thinkpad.

literally the via nano quad

VIA shit is all Centaur, their only attempt to use Cyrix IP got murdered by critics and they ended up releasing the WinChip 4 in a Cyrix mask instead. But both were shit, either way.

How embarrassing.

...

interesting to me that the 1 GHz Thunderbirds didn't edge out the PIII-1000 in this test the same way the 600 MHz Argons did to the 600E

9x seems to be more friendly to Athlons in CCW2K where they are pretty much equal (the Athlon performing a little better) but running a real operating system skews things slightly in the PIII's favor

but they did start picking up again after Intel went full retard

>but running a real operating system
lmao

Athlon still beats PIII with SDRAM as you can see, put the Socket A Athlons on a motherboard with DDR and things will return to normal.

then they just kept raising clocks until things leveled out again
there were no DDR boards when those tests were carried out

Because the Pentium 4 destroyed the brand's reputation.

Core 2 duo/ extreme was such an improvement, it made the Core brand the new Pentium brand of old.

Apple went x86 with the Core 2.

The only way Pentium 4s sold is with Intel bribing OEM... and getting fined billions for doing it.

what a terrible part it was clock-for-clock though