AMD Processors: Ambiguous Naming

[nebulus]

What is it with this new way that AMD name their processors? It is very confusing as their names no longer suggest the Mhz speed like they used to, whereas Pentiums still do. Is this just a ploy by AMD to trick naive people into thinking that their 1900's, 2000's, 2100's &, 2200's etc run at that Mhz speed? Where the heck do they get these figures from?

 

[Mictlantecuhtli]

AMD's Model Numbers, Intel query them

 

[Moto_Psycho]

Last I checked, the AMD CPU 'ratings' (1800+, 1900+, etc.) were supposed to give an idea of how well they compared to a Intel Pentium 4. For example, a 1800 is equivilant in speed to a Pentium 4, 1.8ghz.

 

[hdmk]

Correct me if I'm wrong on this;

The new naming sytem was introduced when AMD introduced the Athlon XP, which ran at lower clock speeds than the Pentium 4. However, as the AMD's do more work per cycle you are in fact getting the same performance.

Thus, a 2000+ is as fast as a 2.0Ghz P4, a 2400+ is as fast as a 2.4Ghz P4. They introduced the naming simply to get the idea across that their chips were just as powerful as the P4.

If they hadn't done so, then they would have lost huge amounts of money, as the public often judge the performance of the system almost entirely on the Mhz (or Ghz) that it runs at..

Hope that's right..

 

[conradguerrero]

AMD's run on lower clock speeds, but they meet or beat P4's running at higher speeds.

Look at the benchmark scores for a system, that will tell you which product is better.

 

[agissi]

Thats exactly correct as every1 has been saying above. You know, 2000+ = (P4 @) 2Ghz and so on. May AMD rule forever!

 

[Vehementi]

I wonder if this will be continued w/ the Athlon 64. And if so, what will the PR ratings be.

Many Athlon XP's aren't even displayed as their true clock speeds, only by their model numbers.