Re:Cannon Lake: Intel’s Forgotten Generation – Chips and Cheese
by acdha on Sunday November 20, 2022 @03:46PM
(#33685088)
> Intel's NetBurst (Pentium 4) wasn't great, so they brought something old back, made improvements, made it dual core, and we had the Intel Core Duo.
Core was based on the mobile-focused Pentium-M design from their Israeli team. That lineage traces back to the Pentium III but both the Pentium-M and Core designs had significant modifications so I wouldn’t describe it as bringing something old back — more like admitting that the NetBurst big gamble had failed and they switched to a design more like what everyone else was making. The P4 was kind of interesting as Intel’s second bust around the turn of the century based on a design which tried to hit higher performance assuming everyone had access to highly-sophisticated compilers and would use them carefully. As with Itanium, I do wonder whether anything would have been different if they’d open sourced icc – the profits weren’t significant and while that could have benefited AMD, I doubt that would have outweighed two major flops.
Core was based on the mobile-focused Pentium-M design from their Israeli team. That lineage traces back to the Pentium III but both the Pentium-M and Core designs had significant modifications so I wouldn’t describe it as bringing something old back — more like admitting that the NetBurst big gamble had failed and they switched to a design more like what everyone else was making. The P4 was kind of interesting as Intel’s second bust around the turn of the century based on a design which tried to hit higher performance assuming everyone had access to highly-sophisticated compilers and would use them carefully. As with Itanium, I do wonder whether anything would have been different if they’d open sourced icc – the profits weren’t significant and while that could have benefited AMD, I doubt that would have outweighed two major flops.