TechSpot

AMD more expensive than Intel clock for clock...

By lokem
Mar 20, 2002
  1. Noticed the article here:

    http://www.slcentral.com/c/agurusworld/30/

    While he's right on some stuff i.e. the 2000+ being slower MHz wise, performance doesn't seem to be so bad... Hmmm...
     
  2. Arris

    Arris TS Evangelist Posts: 4,609   +295

    I think we all know this already...

    $199 for AMD XP 2000+
    $292 for P4 2.0Ghz 478

    I know which one I would be buying.
     
  3. lokem

    lokem TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 672

    Yes, I get what you mean. Nearly all the time, the AMD processors are compared to Intel by their speed and not clock speed; which is obviously the correct thing to do as Mhz is not the correct way of determing which is faster.

    The article only presents another way of looking at the pricing from the Mhz point of view.
     
  4. Arris

    Arris TS Evangelist Posts: 4,609   +295

  5. uncleel

    uncleel TS Rookie Posts: 980

    Take anything that SlackerCentral says w/ a grain of salt. :p
     
  6. lokem

    lokem TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 672

    Point noted :D Thanks!
     
  7. Julio Franco

    Julio Franco TechSpot Editor Posts: 7,059   +646

    heh, that site has concentrated in changing designs over the last year or so, instead of trying to smack up some new content, good for them ;)
     
  8. lokem

    lokem TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 672

    One whole year just to redesign? HEh... Hopefully they'll be concentrating on new content this year!
     
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...