Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD to can Athlon 64s below 2GHz

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 7, 2003 1:12:55 AM

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10880" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10880&lt;/A>


----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>

More about : amd athlon 64s 2ghz

August 7, 2003 2:17:11 AM

Quite interesting. I like the FX nomenclature, trash the PR please!
But if FX is a weak version (not the 1MB L2), then I dunno how useful their 2.4GHZ is to the Athlon 64 1MB. Furthermore, the PR 3700+ for the 2.4GHZ is ridiculous.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 7, 2003 3:10:06 AM

Quote:
Furthermore, the PR 3700+ for the 2.4GHZ is ridiculous.

Well, tough life for AMD: if they rate a 2.4Ghz A64 with the number 3700+, then it has to measure up to a 3.7Ghz Prescott...

It would probably be best if they dumped the PR ratings indeed! :smile:

<font color=red><b>M</b></font color=red>ephistopheles
Related resources
August 7, 2003 6:10:16 AM

<<< then it has to measure up to a 3.7Ghz Prescott...
>>>

huh? the prescott can hardly run at 3.0 GHZ without setting of the sprinkler system in INTEL labs. where u getting a 3.7 GH Prescott from.

boy oh boy u have a rude awakening soming to you soon about the Intel Toaster Oven aka Prescott
August 7, 2003 6:24:24 AM

do you do this to be funny...or are you serious...

Here is what ya don't get...

The prescott SAMPLE that has 100w thermal output is NOT the PRODUCTION MODEL...it is not the final core stepping and therefore you cannot say that it will set off sprinkler systems and such...

I will laugh when the later revisions of the prescott run cooler than the opteron...

If i put my k6 in a Ferrari it would be faster than your your pentium 4 or Athlon XP :tongue:
August 7, 2003 7:59:26 AM

(This is not a reply to Piii_MAN personally but to everyone in this forum)

I am honestly getting VERY tired of this whole popegoldx vs everyone thing. It is pretty obvious that almost nobody agrees with popegoldx, or even shares any of his thoughts. But do you really have to reply to everything he says? Only time will prove him wrong .. or correct!

Even dedicated topics to this started appearing, and I believe it is getting ridiculous. Discuss something with someone you can actually make a discussion with valid points and arguments, otherwise simply ignore him. It's that simple!

And popegoldx. I consider myself an AMD fan too. Only by thinking that I might switch to Intel at my next upgrade, gives me a headache. But sometimes I don't know whether you write some things just to piss everyone off or whether you really mean them. Fact is that AMD is in a really difficult position right now and if you admit it, believe me, you will still live! I want A64 to be a success as much as you do. But if it's not then I have no other choice of following the Intel route. If you want to stick with AMD no matter what, then that's your choice. But that doesn't necessarily means that it's the right thing to do.
August 7, 2003 8:11:08 AM

Actually I believe that the 2.4GHz can stand up to its 3700+ in games probably. But I thing it will simply be ridiculous in other applications such as video editing for example. That's not necessarily AMD's fault but it's because this whole PR thing can't possibly work. I mean they can't rate their processor lower than 3700+ if it does perform like a Pentium 3.7 in some apps, but on the other hand that rating can not be valid for everything. AMD should drop the PR as soon as possible because I believe it's worse for them to make people think they are cheated by their marketing department, than having a lower-performing processor.

Quote:
But if FX is a weak version (not the 1MB L2), then I dunno how useful their 2.4GHZ is to the Athlon 64 1MB.

I can't understand what you are saying here. FX is actually their "strong" version, since it's the one supporting dual-channel memory.
August 8, 2003 2:57:34 AM

Hmm, I see, but it has 512KB L2. Which is an odd trade-off really, and prolly won't have much difference in performance.
I'd rather get an FX just to get rid of the POS PR.

Marketting depts in economy class had such a theoretical aspect compared to reality. it previously was to study market, see what consumers want. Now it's lying and competing the enemy to death with lies. How sad this capitalistic world has become.

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>The sexiest website ever, guaranteed XXX!!!</font color=blue></b></A> :wink:
PS: New sexy users' sites now added! :smile:
August 8, 2003 3:06:50 AM

It's about time for AMD. Can the under 2 Ghz.
August 8, 2003 3:10:07 AM

Scotty 3.4 Ghz 3.6, 3.8 ,4.0 an on an on it goes.
!