The obtained results clearly indicate that all major execution units of our Presler CPU work exactly like those of the Smithfield manufactured with 90nm technology process.
However, it is still too early to claim that we have looked at all the differences between the Smithfield and Presler processors. One of Presler’s major advantages should become its new production scheme, which will allow Intel to significantly reduce the production cost of these processors. Unlike Smithfield based on a solid core, Presler will be built from two independent processor dies, which will be combined only on the packaging stage.
In other words, Intel doesn’t have to manufacture large dies from the very beginning. There will be two individual Cedar Mill cores under the Presler package, and these cores can either be used for the dual-core CPUs, or for the single-core Pentium 4 600. So, it would be more correct to call Presler not a “dual-core” processor, but a “doubled” processor.
Note that with the new opportunities for more cost-effective dual-core CPUs production Intel should very aggressive in delivering the volume to the market in 2006. The desktop segment is expected to be 70% dual-core by the end of next year.
By the way, this forecast makes us believe that Intel regards Cedar Mill as a sort of a side-effect product, with Presler being their flagship solution. However, you shouldn’t forget that NetBurst processor architecture will not last long and if things go as planned, these CPUs will leave the stage in the middle of next year already.