Why AMD for gaming?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eddie G
  • Start date Start date
Bitstring <[email protected]>, from the


=Officially= all AMD xxxx+ numbers were supposed to be aligned to a
'vanilla model' Athlon, iirc. (Back when a 1000+ ran at 1000 Mhz).

They'd get into trouble comparing vs competitors products.
Click to expand...

Why? Remember the PR rating system?
 
This doesn't apply to Semprons. Various posters have reported that Sempron
numbers performs like Athlon minus 400.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to apply to Semprons - given the formal Athlon "alignment",
what's wrong with selling a "scaled back" version?!?!?! AMD spells out the
difference in cache etc. Intel sells the "scaled back" same-number MHz as
further proof that they are not a reliable measure.
 
George said:
It doesn't have to apply to Semprons - given the formal Athlon "alignment",
what's wrong with selling a "scaled back" version?!?!?! AMD spells out the
difference in cache etc. Intel sells the "scaled back" same-number MHz as
further proof that they are not a reliable measure.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Just look at Intel's 2.8 Ghz processors: Northwood, Prescott, 128k,
256k, 512k, 1M, 2M, single, dual, ??? Hence a number 2800 doesn't tell very
much.

A company once described a PC model "3200", as they used a Celeron 320D :-)
 
Back
Top