Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 19 of 19
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paed.../pentium-m.ars basicaly from what ive read its not an exact hybrid but it does take features from a pentium 3 core....
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #11
    Linux User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    369

    http://arstechnica.com/articles/paed.../pentium-m.ars basicaly from what ive read its not an exact hybrid but it does take features from a pentium 3 core.

  2. #12
    Linux User GNU_man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canada, eh
    Posts
    284
    Everything from the Pentium Pro & up is called i686
    PTL x10 Hallelujah!
    AMD Athlon XP 2600+ 512MB RAM Dual 80G WD HD 8MB Cache (1 WinXP Home, 1 CentOS 4.2) GeForce Ti4200 128MB SB Live! 5.1
    Registered Linux user #391521

  3. #13
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    49
    hes right

  4. $spacer_open
    $spacer_close
  5. #14
    Linux Engineer
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,429
    Yep. But i486 and stuff is fairly large. PIII, P4, P-M, K7 & K8 and stuff are also i686 architecture. Yet AMD's architecture is fairly different from Intel's. Nor are the PIII's and P4's architectures similar (P4 uses the Netburst architecture).
    ** Registered Linux User # 393717 and proud of it ** Check out www.zenwalk.org
    ** Zenwalk 2.8 - Xfce 4.4 beta 2- 2.6.17.6 kernel = Slack on steroids! **

  6. #15
    Linux User GNU_man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canada, eh
    Posts
    284
    Yet AMD's architecture is fairly different from Intel's. Nor are the PIII's and P4's architectures similar (P4 uses the Netburst architecture).
    I guess it depends on what your definition of "similar architecture" is. The PC industry considers a CPU that can execute all the Pentium Pro instructions such as cmov , has a 36-bit address bus (P-Pro+) and is fully IA32 compliant to be "similar"- but a better word would be compatible

    I don't know how you could say PIII's and P4's are NOT similar in architecture

    Differences between the P4 & PIII are:

    -SSE2 (P4)
    - Longer pipeline (can be clocked higher)
    - a bunch of industry buzzwords to impress the public.

    Big deal.
    PTL x10 Hallelujah!
    AMD Athlon XP 2600+ 512MB RAM Dual 80G WD HD 8MB Cache (1 WinXP Home, 1 CentOS 4.2) GeForce Ti4200 128MB SB Live! 5.1
    Registered Linux user #391521

  7. #16
    Linux Engineer
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,429
    Wasn't the P4 design a new one? It's not based ont the PIII afaik. Of course, the amount of differences depend on the point of view, that's always the case.
    ** Registered Linux User # 393717 and proud of it ** Check out www.zenwalk.org
    ** Zenwalk 2.8 - Xfce 4.4 beta 2- 2.6.17.6 kernel = Slack on steroids! **

  8. #17
    Linux User GNU_man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canada, eh
    Posts
    284
    Quote Originally Posted by borromini
    Wasn't the P4 design a new one? It's not based ont the PIII afaik. Of course, the amount of differences depend on the point of view, that's always the case.
    Believe it or not, it really wasn't a new design. They are ALL based on the IA32 architecture that was introduced with the release of the 386. If it was not based on previous CPU's like the PIII and so on, how would it be compatible? The P4 still even has a 16-bit 'real mode' for full backwards compatibility with the 8086 DOS software! This is a strength though, not a weakness. I'm glad they've maintained full compatibility along the way. A lot of people have dual boot FreeDOS/Windows machines running with P4's! DOS is alive and well
    PTL x10 Hallelujah!
    AMD Athlon XP 2600+ 512MB RAM Dual 80G WD HD 8MB Cache (1 WinXP Home, 1 CentOS 4.2) GeForce Ti4200 128MB SB Live! 5.1
    Registered Linux user #391521

  9. #18
    Linux User
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    369
    Quote Originally Posted by GNU_man
    Believe it or not, it really wasn't a new design. They are ALL based on the IA32 architecture that was introduced with the release of the 386. If it was not based on previous CPU's like the PIII and so on, how would it be compatible? The P4 still even has a 16-bit 'real mode' for full backwards compatibility with the 8086 DOS software! This is a strength though, not a weakness. I'm glad they've maintained full compatibility along the way. A lot of people have dual boot FreeDOS/Windows machines running with P4's! DOS is alive and well
    I have a p100 which has dos(for old games) anyway the p4 does not make a great cpu for mobiles.

  10. #19
    Linux User GNU_man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canada, eh
    Posts
    284
    the p4 does not make a great cpu for mobiles.
    That's because it's a power-hog. That's why they make the Centrino, which allows a way longer battery life. Thus, P4 laptops cost a lot less than Centrino's.
    PTL x10 Hallelujah!
    AMD Athlon XP 2600+ 512MB RAM Dual 80G WD HD 8MB Cache (1 WinXP Home, 1 CentOS 4.2) GeForce Ti4200 128MB SB Live! 5.1
    Registered Linux user #391521

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •