iB::Topic::Athlon 1800 or 1.6mMhz?

	Ikonboard.com :: Ikonboard Website Forums

» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Ikonboard » Public Forums » The Classroom » Athlon 1800 or 1.6mMhz?


Page 1 of 212>> [ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

Topic: Athlon 1800 or 1.6mMhz?

< Next Oldest | Next Newest >

Post Number: 1

Dark Knight Bob

qunt

Group: Members
Posts: 2180
Joined: Sep. 2001

Posted on: Oct. 29 2001,09:55

seeing as intel have blatently taken advantage of stupid people by claiming raw clock speed is the only important factor in a processor, what does everyone think about AMD's response in using the intel comparison benchmarking system.

personally i think the only two problems it has is trying to convince the general public (stupid people) that this alternate way of marking processors is more accurate and that it'll take a while for people to get used to refering to processors in model numbers rather than clock speed. but at the end of the day it is a more honest way of doing things. if you ignore the blatant naming of athlon XP's, AMD doesnt try to bullshit its customers as much as intel do and at the end of the day everyone should realise that a processor alone does not a good system make

EDIT: fuck screwed the topic title up!
------------------
simultaneity is not absolute. So just because you think i'm wrong, from my frame of reference i'm right!

This message has been edited by Dark Knight Bob on October 30, 2001 at 04:55 AM

Post Number: 2

kornalldaway

1337 like alan turing
Avatar

Group: Members
Posts: 297
Joined: Jan. 2001

Posted on: Oct. 29 2001,10:05

Skip to the previous post in this topic.

i think it's great
for all the computer illiterate who think it's actually a 1.8GHz it's just a better incentive to buy
and for people who actually read about these things the actuall clock speed of the CPU is well known
so either way it's not to trick anybody, it's merely to compete with pentium better and to show how crappy intel's benchmarking is
most of the people would say that Athlon XP 1800 euns just as good or even better then Pentium 4 1.8GHz. There is no mistery in that, so if pentium's 1.8 is worse then Athlon's 1.6 then why not change the name of 1.6 to 1800+
that would appeal to general public much more and would be true in comparison with intel's pentium 4.

as long as pentium does it, why is it wrong for Athlon. At least they don't deny the actuall clock speed of the processor

Post Number: 3

damien_s_lucifer

Emperor of Detnet

Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: Jan. 1970

Posted on: Oct. 29 2001,19:10

The old PR system got a really bad rep because the manufacturers inflated the PR rating too much, making it dishonest and untrustworthy. A Cyrix MII PR2-333 comes nowhere near the performance of a Pentium II 333, but because it kept up with a P2 on a single benchmark that measured raw MIPS, they stamped it a PR2-333.

AMD's PR numbers seem to be much more accurate this time... it seems that the new PR rating is the one where it equals or outperforms the P4 across a whole range of benchmarks, rather than just one or two, making the system much more honest. The 1800+ chips are actually outperforming 1.9GHz P4's in most benchmarks, and outperforming the 2.0GHz P4's on a couple.

Since they're being honest about the PR's, I'd say this is a very shrewd move on AMD's part.

Post Number: 4

L33T_h4x0r_d00d

IT terrorist
Avatar

Group: Members
Posts: 1203
Joined: Sep. 2000

Posted on: Oct. 29 2001,21:44

Ive had my XP1800 for like 2 weeks now and I couldnt be happier. Its the fastest windows based machine Ive ever used. As soon as my new peltier gets here were gonna see if we can hit 2.0ghz.

------------------
trying to use fortran is like trying to insert pineapples in your ass... it just aint right. -DKB

Post Number: 5

afropik

DetVet

Group: Members
Posts: 155
Joined: Jul. 2001

Posted on: Oct. 29 2001,21:59

I'd go with the athlon hands down.

Post Number: 6

demonk

The other white meat

Group: Members
Posts: 800
Joined: Aug. 2000

Posted on: Oct. 30 2001,02:18

I can't wait until the next revision of the P4's. I've heard about some of the improvements, and I think AMD will have a BIG challenge on their hands. For the last year or so they have been competing against a 1st revision of a chip with their 6th or 7th revision chip. Let's see how they can keep up with the P4 Prescott on the Northwood process. <evil grin>

edit: Just wanted to add, I'm really glad that both Intel and AMD are around. They are forcing each other to keep improving their products AND drop their prices. The winner: US
------------------
10 PRINT "HOME"
20 PRINT "SWEET"
30 GOTO 10

This message has been edited by demonk on October 30, 2001 at 09:20 PM

Post Number: 7

incubus

mack daddy
Avatar

Group: Admins
Posts: 1316
Joined: May 2000

Posted on: Nov. 05 2001,00:45

quote:
Originally posted by demonk:
I can't wait until the next revision of the P4's. I've heard about some of the improvements, and I think AMD will have a BIG challenge on their hands. For the last year or so they have been competing against a 1st revision of a chip with their 6th or 7th revision chip. Let's see how they can keep up with the P4 Prescott on the Northwood process. <evil grin>
edit: Just wanted to add, I'm really glad that both Intel and AMD are around. They are forcing each other to keep improving their products AND drop their prices. The winner: US

No ... y'see, the next round are meant to be dropping RAMBUS. The reason that P4' do so well in benchmarks is that they are backed my Rambus memory. AMD are stuck with DDR at best. Everyone acknowledges that P4's are clunky shit, and that P3s are actually better processors in general, beating the P4s in several tests.

If we could level the memory playing field i assure you AMD would piss all over intel in every single respect.

And yes the consumer wins, so i dont care!

------------------
"just pressin y0 butt0ns f00" -- miNus

Post Number: 8

askheaves

Ack!!!

Group: Members
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sep. 2000

Posted on: Nov. 05 2001,01:32

This whole process doesn't bother me too much for a couple reasons. AMD chips may be stretching themselves to be faster per clock than intel chips. The thing is, intel chips, under the current design, are really designed for 2.0Ghz + speeds and probably only need a manufacturing update to make 3Ghz. At that point, AMD is totally behind and intel will mop up. There's no way they can compete.

Intel is actually being sort of evil in throttling their chips to the level that AMD is just enough to stay ahead. It's like that guy who could always run way faster than you, but let you stay 2 feet behind them to encourage you. This is the best time for them strategically too, seeing the economy as it is. Make the technological advancements while chip sales are down and spring totally bitchin chips on the world when they'll sell well. How evil

And, have any of you seen the tomshardware review of AMD vs Intel chips when you remove the fan from them? It's the funniest thing I've ever seen in my life.