Analysis and Comparison of Different Microprocessors
Analysis and Comparison of Different Microprocessors
Table 1. Intel Earlier Processors with specifications Pro MHz MHz 512 KiB
1024 KiB
Processor Clock Addressable Cache Bus Pentium Single 233-450 66,100 256 KiB
Speed Memory Speed II MHz MHz 512 KiB
Table 4. Intel Atom and Celeron Processors with 6.1 Dual-Core Processing
specifications Intel implemented dual core processors across every sector like
desktop, workstation, mobile, mainframe, These products include
Processor No. of Clock Bus speed Cache
cores rate Intel Core 2 Duo desktop and mobile processors, and Dual-Core Intel
Xeon 5100 processor 5100 series for dual-processor servers. The
Atom Single, 800MHz- 400 MHz 512 KiB- Dual-Core Intel Xeon 5100 server processor delivers up to 135
Double 2.13GHz 533 MHz 1 MiB percent performance improvements and up to a 40 percent reduction
in energy consumption over previous Intel server products. The
667 MHz
Intel Core 2 Duo desktop processor delivers up to a 40 percent
2.5 GT/s improvement in performance and up to a 40 percent reduction in
power as compared to today's high-end Intel Pentium D processor
Celeron Single, 266MHz- 66 MHz 0KiB- 960.4. The Intel Core 2 Duo mobile processor delivers greater
Double 3.6GHz 100 MHz 1MiB than 2X CPU performance5 and up to a 28 percent power
133 MHz reduction with new Intel Centrino Duo mobile technology laptops
based on the Intel Core 2 Duo processor as compared to
400 MHz previous-generation Intel Centrino mobile technology based
533 MHz laptops.
800 MHz
6.2 Quad-Core Technology
Intel Core 2 Extreme Quad-Core Processor was World’s First
5.3 Intel Xeon Processors Quad-Core for the Desktop. For today’s increasing need of
Intel Xeon processor had huge range of cores, that is single, double, multiprocessing, multithreading this quad-core technology serves the
quad, hexa, octa cores. purpose. It is great plus for gaming and multimedia processing
machines and engines. In addition to being excellent for intensive
multitasking, the Intel Core 2 Extreme quad-core processor is
Table 5. Intel Xeon Processor with specifications intended to provide impressive gaming performance, plenty of
Processor No. of Clock Bus speed Cache emphasis on thread-intensive games. Gamers can expect a smoother,
cores rate more exciting gaming experience through the distribution of artificial
Xeon Single, 400MHz- 100 MHz, 256 KiB- intelligence (AI), physics and rendering across four hardware
threads. Intel Core 2 Extreme quad-core processor can be ideal for
Double, 4.4GHz 133 MHz, 12Mib processor-intensive, highly threaded applications as well as it can be
Quad, 400 MHz, the top choice for multimedia enthusiasts, gamers, and workers who
Hexa, intend to demand multitasking environments. It is intended to feature
533 MHz,
Octa 2.66 GHz core speed and 1066 MHz front side bus speed.
667 MHz,
800 MHz,
6.3 Basic differences between i3, i5 and i7
1066MHz, i3, i5, i7 processors are great advancements of Intel. I3 is a dual core
1333MHz, processor, i5 can have both two or four cores, that is it can be dual
core or quad core depending upon the model being used, i7 can have
1600MHz,
two, four or six cores, that is dual core or quad core or hexa core,
4.8 GT/s, depending on the model being used.
5.86 GT/s, The crux has been shown in the following table :
6.4 GT/s Table 6. Processors and their number of cores, threads
No. of Threads
Processor No. of Cores (2 per core)
6.4.3 i7 processor
If one has to do graphic publishing, create music, do programming 8.2 Thunderbird (T-Bird)
and compiling, watch HD movies, play games which are visually It was the second generation Athlon. It was launched on June 5,
appealing parallel to all the things mentioned for i3 and i5, then a 2000. It was designed for the speeds ranging from 600 MHz to 1.4
quad core i5 or i7 can be a very good choice. GHz. Athlon Classic used to clock up to 1 GHz. So here it was an
advancement. However, the major difference was of the cache
design. There is a general rule that more cache improves
7. AMD (Advanced Micro Devices) performance but faster cache improves it further still. Hence, just as
Intel had done when they replaced the old Katmai- based
Microprocessors Pentium III with the much faster Coppermine-based Pentium
AMD was founded by Jerry Sanders in 1969. In 1972-74, AMD III, AMD replaced the 512 kB external reduced-speed cache of
went on public with their first manufacturing facility. In 1976-78, the Athlon Classic with 256 kB of on-chip, full-speed exclusive
AMD signed a cross-license agreement with Intel as there was a huge cache.
competition between the two. In 1981, sales and components got The Thunderbird was one of the most successful products of
doubled since 1978. In 1982, second source for 8086 and 8088 AMD. It had quite improved mainboard designs. In October 2000,
CPU’s got launched. 1985 was quite fruitful for AMD as sales the Athlon “C” had been introduced which raised the motherboard
touched the highest point in 1985. Year 1991 was again quite front-side bus speed from 100 MHz to 133 MHz and parallel to
important for AMD as that year AMD’s Am386 microprocessor that it provided around 10% of extra performance per clock.
family debuts through which AMD challenged Intel. ATI introduces
Mach8 chip and board products which were first ATI products to
process graphics independently of the CPU. In 1993, Am486 Table 8. Thunderbird (T-Bird) processor specifications
microprocessor family and flash memory got launched by AMD. In L1 Cache L2 Cache Clock rate
1994, agreement with Compaq was signed. One major partnership
announced in 1998 paired AMD with semiconductor giant Motorola. 64 + 64 kB (Data + 256 kB, fullspeed Slot A: 650–
In the announcement, Sanders referred to the partnership as creating Instructions) 1000 MHz
a "virtual gorilla" that would enable AMD to compete with Intel
Socket A, 100 MHz
on fabrication capacity while limiting AMD's financial outlay for
new facilities. This partnership also helped to co-develop copper- FSB (B-models):
based semiconductor technology, which would become a 600–1400 MHz
cornerstone of the K7 production process. In August 1999, AMD Socket A, 133 MHz
released the Athlon (K7) processor. FSB (C-models):
1000–1400 MHz
8. AMD ATHLON PROCESSORS
AMD designed and manufactured a series of x-86 compatible
processors. AMD gave this series the brand name as Athlon. Athlon 8.3 Athlon XP (Palomino)
means “contest” in Greek. First Athlon was released ion June 23, AMD released third generation Athlonits code name was
1999. Palomino. It was launched as Athlon XP on October 9, 2001. XP
meant to be “Extended Performance”. It is also believed to be an architecture and added a hardware data prefetch mechanism
unofficial reference to Microsoft Windows XP. Athlon XP was to take better advantage of available memory bandwidth.
launched at speeds between 1.33 GHz and 1.53 GHz. It January, Palomino was also the first socketed Athlon. It officially supported
2002, AMD enhanced this and released the subsequent 1.67 GHz dual processing. It was branded as Athlon MP. Palomino actually
Athlon XP 2000+. Palomino was the first K7 core to include the full came into existence first in mobiles. It was branded there as Mobile
SSE instruction set from the Intel Pentium III, as well as AMD's Athlon 4 (“Corvette”).
3DNow! Professional. It is around 10% faster than Thunderbird
at the same clock speed. The core has enhancements to the K7's
Table 9. Athlon XP (Palomino) processor of its release, Intel’s Pentium 4 had become more competitive.
specification AMD simply increases the L2 cache to 512 kB but it did not
make any impact as the Athlon pipeline was not as cache
constrained as of Pentium 4. AMD increased the performance
L1 Cache L2 Cache Clock rate but not as much as that it could beat Intel’s Pentium 4. The
64 + 64 kB (Data + 256 kB, fullspeed Athlon 4: 850– 800 MT/s bus used by many later Pentium 4 processors was
well out of the Athlon XP's reach. In order to reach the
Instructions) 1400 MHz same bandwidth levels, the Athlon XP's bus would have
Athlon XP: 1333– to be clocked at levels simply unreachable. To maintain or
exceed the performance of Intel's newer processors would
1733 MHz (1500+ require a significant redesign.
to 2100+)
Athlon MP: 1000– Table 11. Barton and Thorton processor specifications
1733 MHz L1 Cache L2 Cache Clock rate
64 + 64 kB (Data + 256 kB, fullspeed 1667–2200 MHz
Instructions) (2000+ to 3100+)
8.4 Thoroughbred (T-Bred) 133 MHz FSB:
It was fourth generation Athlon and was released on June 10,
2002. It had the speed of 1.8 GHz. It was released with two 1600–2133 MHz
cores: Tbred-A and Tbred-B. AMD was successful in reducing (2000+ to 2600+)
the production cost per processor but was not able to
expectedly reduce the heat and clock scalability. This occurred 166 MHz FSB:
because of the unmodified design of Palomino. AMD’s T-Bred 2083 MHz (2600+)
was targeted to replace Palomino but could not increase its
speed as compared to Palomino. T-Bred was only sold in the 200 MHz FSB:
versions of 1333 MHz to 1800 MHz. It was only able to 2200 MHz (3100+)
displace more production-costly Palomino. Thus AMD
redesigned T-Bred. It was already a complex structure of 8-
layer but now AMD added another ninth metal layer. Its
competitor Pentium 4 utilized only six. And its successor
Prescott used 7 layers. The Tbred-B was more improved in 8.6 Competitors of Athlon
headroom compared to Tbred-A. So it became very popular for
overlocking. While Tbred-A always struggled in reaching The major competitors of Athlon were Intel Pentium III, Pentium
clock- speeds above 1.9 GHz, Tbred-B could easily reach 2.3 IV, Celeron, Via C3 and C7, Transmeta Efficeon.
GHz and above.
Table 10. Thunderbird (T-Bred) processor specifications 9. CELERON PROCESSOR
L1 Cache L2 Cache Clock rate Celeron is the brand name given by Intel to those processors
which are typically aimed at budget of an individual. Because they
64 + 64 kB (Data + 256 kB, fullspeed Thoroughbred "A": aimed at the budget, high and advanced features are intentionally
Instructions) 1400–1800 MHz disabled by Intel. Generally, the cache is also of smaller memory
(1600+ to 2200+) in the Celeron processor. There were variable performance issues
noticed due to the lack of these features. Most of the Celeron
Thoroughbred "B":
processors gave the degraded performance, but there were few
1400–2250 MHz which were known for very good performances. But generally
Celeron processor had less performance than the higher-end
(1600+ to 2800+)
processors of Intel, although it was intentional. The first Celeron
processor was based on Intel Pentium II. Further versions of
Celeron processors were based on Pentium III, Pentium IV,
Pentium M and Intel Core brands. The latest Celeron Processor
was launched in July 2011 and was based on the Intel i3/i5/i7
brands. Although, this design was independent but had only about
66% of the cache memory as of Intel i3 processor.
8 . 5 B arton an d T h orton
It was fifth generation processor. It got released in early 2003. 10 . VIA C3 PRO CE S S O RS
Its L2 cache was increased to 512 KB. It did not have higher VIA C3 family is designed by Centaur Technology and sold by
clock rates than Thoroughbred-core processors. By the time VIA Technologies. It has been majorly aimed at the personal
computers. Intel had great performance desktop processors. Transmeta design
was incapable of beating that. One of the major problems was
Transmeta’s radical new approach to microprocessor design.
1 0 . 1 Des i gn Meth o d ol ogy Transmeta processors couldn’t run the x86 software by
Although, VIA’s chips are quite slower than AMD and Intel, on themselves. Despite using the best emulation technology,
the basis of clock, but they are quite small in size, very easy to Transmeta was incapable of matching the performance of Intel in
manufacture and of low power. Hence, they are always quite the field of desktop microprocessors. Now the company decided to
attractive in terms of embedded systems. Mobile marketplace is move its focus on the notebook and embedded processors. But
also finding it attractive nowadays. Samuel 2 Ezra cores were used nothing went right for Transmeta. When Intel, AMD, VIA and
for VIA Cyrix III and then was renames as VIA C3. Nehemiah other popular companies took over, the crusoe was in the danger.
Cores were used for VIA C5. This feature of VIA has always So, in all the Transmeta gave its shot but Intel wins as usual.
turned in its own favor in spite of higher range processors of Intel.
VIA is trying to narrow down the gap of performance which has
been created. 13. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION
This was an attempt to make best possible analysis and basic
11. TRANSMETA CRUSOE comparison among the microprocessors which are popularly used.
As such there are thousands of microprocessors, but I hope this
AND EFFICEON gives a general idea of the processors in the market including their
Crusoe was the first in the family of x-86 compatible history and strategies. In sum, Intel has always been at the top of
microprocessors developed by Transmeta. The second generation the market and AMD always had potential to give Intel a good
processor of Transmeta was Efficeon. It implies a software engine competition. Other companies are also famous for some of their
which converts the code written for processor to the native processors and have their own pros and cons.
instruction set of the chip. Efficeon stresses computational
efficiency, low power consumption, and a low thermal footprint
just like its predecessor, the Transmeta Crusoe.
14. REFERENCES
[1] http://www.intel.com
12. TRANSMETA V/S INTEL- [2] h t t p : / / w w w . m a x i m u m p c . c o m
TRANSMETA FAILED! [3] http://www.electronicshub.org/
Transmeta became out of funds from the investors. Transmeta
wanted to give good competition to Intel, but could not achieve [4] http://www.amd.com
the benchmarks. Intel always had huge backing of finances. [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Intel_processors
Someone who desires to compete Intel in whole sole manner,
needs to have huge backing. Intel has the all alone supremacy in [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon
the world of microprocessors. It is a mighty empire in itself.
Transmeta was founded in 1995. Intel had vast financial [7] http://mintywhite.com
resources, world-class engineering and its own chip fabrication
plants. Compared to that, Transmeta was a quite small body which [8] “Floating Point Processor.” Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia.
was a semiconductor company. Transmeta always tried really
hard but it got realized after many years that it cannot beat Intel.