Virtually ever since the rumors of Intel?s Prescott processor first began to surface, we?ve been pondering whether current small form factor systems can handle the temperature and power requirements of Intel?s new 800 lb. gorilla CPU. Opinions abound, from "there?s no way" to "why not?", but only a definitive test could answer the question. Early reviews pouring in over the net have shown varied temperature, power, and performance numbers for the Prescott processor within standard desktop systems, but few, if any, have attempted to test the new beast within the confines of a small form factor box. Perhaps their insurance premiums weren?t paid up so they didn?t want to take the risk. Nevertheless, the question still stands, do Prescott and SFF mix?

With power dissipation rumored to be in excess of 100 Watts, how could an SFF system handle such an energy hog? And even if it could, how would you keep it from burning up? Many are still wondering if current SFF Bios?s and motherboards will even handle the new CPU. Most manufacturers have been rather quiet, but what?s the real story?

Today we aim to answer these questions and more by stress testing our review sample Intel Prescott 3.2 GHz E processor within the Shuttle SB75G2 XPC. As you?ll see in the review, we showed that Prescott has essentially the same performance as Intel?s Northwood core and was actually slower in some tests. This coupled with the excessive heat made us conclude that, at this time, the Intel Northwood should still be the processor of choice. Nevertheless Intel plans to push forward with the Prescott core and that means our SFF readers will want to upgrade. Should they?

Let?s just say you?re in for quite a rollercoaster of a ride. Unfortunately, the ending isn?t very pretty, nor did it smell good. But like most stories, everything begins on a positive note?

Performance, Temperatures and Noise

Performance, Temperatures and Noise

Let?s have a look at the raw data. We?ve lined up a comparison of Prescott at both 3.2 and 3.36 GHz, as well as our Pentium 4 2.4 GHz C processor at stock and overclocked speeds. First up, PC Mark 2002 CPU testing.

No, folks, it?s not a typo. Ironically the Northwood processor running at 3.06 GHz beats the Prescott at 3.2 Ghz by over 10%. This is consistent with the buzz lately about Prescott?s lackluster performance. As you can see, overclocking to 3.36 GHz yields a slight performance increase, but still not nearly as high as the traditional Pentium 4 C processor. Perhaps memory testing would yield different results.

Here the Prescott seems to shine. Ironic, as this test doesn?t stress the CPU so much as the DDR to Northbridge connection. Nevertheless, the Prescott overclocked to 3.36 GHz outperforms the overclocked Northwood. Note that at stock speeds though, it matches the Northwood closely.

Sandra?s CPU ALU testing shows similar, lackluster, results.

Note how once again the Northwood at 3.06 GHz beats out the stock and overclocked Prescott. Clearly the Prescott really isn?t shining here. In fact, with increased power and temperatures and reduced performance, we?re beginning to wonder why anyone would buy this chip.

Let?s take a look at CPU temperatures. Note that we were able to measure temperature at 3.5 GHz, before our PSU meltdown.

Between the overclocked Northwood at 3.06 GHz, and the Prescott at 3.2 GHz, there was over a 25% increase in CPU temperature. This for an increase in clock speed by only 140 MHz, as well as overall reduced performance. Note that the Prescott running in the mid 70?s under load is considered "normal" by Intel?s standards. The 83 degrees Celsius temperature though was really starting to push things.

And you thought the CPU got hot. In parallel with CPU measurements, we also measured PSU temperature via HMonitor. The results were as follows.

That?s right, the PSU hit 94 C before it popped and died. At 94 C, you could quite literally fry an egg on it. But also note here that even at stock performance of 3.2 GHz, the system?s PSU was operating at 82 C, well beyond the manufacturer?s specifications for the unit which appear to be around 50 C. It?s been said that operating a PSU at these types of temperatures over the course of time can greatly reduce its lifespan and cause the unit to eventually die. For this reason, using the Prescott processor within this XPC may not be a wise move, even at stock speeds, without quite a bit of extra cooling.

Finally, we took noise measurements at all speeds, including with the original Northwood processor.

As you can see, the increased speed of both the ICE Cooling Fan and PSU fans contributed greatly to overall system noise. The original SB75G2 configuration with a standard Pentium 4 Northwood was already the loudest of all SFF?s we?ve tested. Combine that with the Prescott, and at 3.5 GHz, the system is over 2X louder. If you?ve ever heard an XPC during initial boot, when the Bios kicks the fan to full speed temporarily, this is even louder than that, as the PSU fans were also at full speed in our overclocking experiments.

What?s the bottom line?

< previous - (4 of 5) - next >

---

• Meet Prescott (1 of 5)
• Testbench Setup (2 of 5)
• An Overclocking Experience to Remember (3 of 5)
• Performance, Temperatures and Noise (4 of 5)
• Conclusion (5 of 5)