http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/d [...] 73218.html

Ok looks to me like amd is following intel on this one. but I'm not suprized I just wish they would do it on a standard set of real bench marks rather than amd comparing itself to intel. just my 2 cents.

Advanced Micro Devices, the company who used the so-called “performance rating” to mark its processors in the past and who utilizes it nowadays, has reportedly decided to end this practice and adopt model numbers that resemble those that are going to be used by its rival Intel Corporation.

According to a report at HardWare.fr citing a document that seems to be an internal memo from AMD, “since AMD processors P-Rating has always be a meant to position AMD Athlon products in comparison with Intel processors and since Intel has decided to give up their CPU branding based on frequency, AMD also has to move towards a new P-Rating system. It is mandatory in order to let AMD’s customers understand how AMD positions its processors. The P-ratings will be used from the third quarter 2004 and will concern only the Athlon 64 processors.”

AMD has always claimed officially that its “P-Rating”, also known as model number, corresponds with performance estimate for AMD Athlon “Thunderbird” processor at certain frequency with specified cache.

In case the information is correct and AMD’s new strategy will see the light of the day, the company’s desktop 64-bit processors will be branded as follows:

AMD Athlon 64 560+: AMD Athlon 64 3400+;
AMD Athlon 64 550+: AMD Athlon 64 3200+;
AMD Athlon 64 540+: AMD Athlon 64 3000+;
AMD Athlon 64 530+: AMD Athlon 64 2800+;
Starting from the late second quarter of 2004 Intel Corporation will mark its CPUs according to their position in its product family or series. The first digit in the model number reflects product positioning; another two digits reveal relative performance within a concrete family of chips. The rating will make pretty tough to compare microprocessors of different series by their working frequency, but is supposed to reveal clear processor’s place in its family. Intel will use its model numbers only on processors in LGA775 packaging. Intel’s supposed product line is likely to look as follows:

Pentium 4 570: actual clock-speed 3.80GHz;
Pentium 4 560: actual clock-speed 3.60GHz;
Pentium 4 550: actual clock-speed 3.40GHz;
Pentium 4 540: actual clock-speed 3.20GHz;
Pentium 4 530: actual clock-speed 3.00GHz;
Pentium 4 520: actual clock-speed 2.80GHz.
Intel will also use its model number approach with its mobile processors.

It is not clear how AMD plans to explain the change with its markings officially and how customers should distinguish between PGA939 and PGA754 chips.

AMD did not comment on the story at press time.



If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

Doesn't AMD's Opteron already use the three digit system?? I.E Opteron 2xx/1xx/8xx.

You might want to check the dates on those articles. What day are we today ? Exactly, you got suckered

Besides, its not nice to copy paste an entire article. Copy paste the most relevant parts, but link to the article for the rest. The authors deserve the credit and pagehits for their work, its there only income.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

Uh P4,

You sure? The articles are dated March 31 although the french article is dated on March 31, 23:25, which is dangerously close to April 1st.

Also, the french page has a reference to a japanese page, which is dated on April 1st. Interesting, a timezone warped April 1st joke?


BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>

>The articles are dated March 31

I guess xbit fell for it as well ?

> although the french article is dated on March 31, 23:25,
>which is dangerously close to April 1st

Isnt it ? I guess the site doesnt have a timed publication mechanisme, and the author wanted to go to bed. Either that, or he fell for it too.

>so, the french page has a reference to a japanese page,
>which is dated on April 1st. Interesting, a timezone warped
>April 1st joke?

Thats what I think. No, I'm not 100% certain, but fairly certain nevertheless.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

I'm not sure on your logic here, Intel will no longer use a MHZ scale to gauge their CPU's. Thats what AMD's PR system is based off, if there is no MHZ logic dictates change in direction of prodcut targeting. In this case AMD's PR system is scrapped. Fail to see why this is so hard for you to accept.

Xeon

<font color=orange>Scratch Here To Reveal Prize</font color=orange>

I agree with you and the link Darko posted seems to make sense.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt

Oh its not "hard to accept for me", I love the Athlon FX and opteron numbering scheme for its simplicity, and I wouldnt mind seeing current PR ratings go away... I just don't believe the articles. Read the <A HREF="http://www.hardware.fr/news/lire/31-03-2004/" target="_new">hardware.fr</A> article, it contains a screenshot of an "internal AMD memo", that really doesnt look all that authentic. Secondly, this quote:
"L'outsider n°1 d'Intel en aurait même profiter pour revoir plus favorablement ses comparaisons Athlon 64 / Pentium 4, ceci étant probablement lié au fait que les Pentium 4 Socket 775 seront plus lents que les Pentium 4 Socket 478 du fait de la DDR2 !"

In short, it says AMD would use higher model numbers than equivalent Prescotts, because prescotts on S775 using DDR2 would be slower.

Lastly, the only source of hardware.fr is sleazy, which published its article on april 1st. I can't find that article though.

To conclude, it *could* be true, but I think its a Chinese april 1 joke where the funniest parts got lost in translation. I guess we will know tomorrow ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

hey P4man, I see theinquierer believes it to a a april fools joke.

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15103" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15103</A>

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt

I'm sure they just read my post here

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

April 1st, hook line and sinker. OMG...

If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

don't feel bad about it, the story wasnt really extraordinary, nor very funny, even on hindsight. If I had only read the xbit article, I'd have believed it too. And who knows, maybe it still turns out true, i'm still not willing to bet a lot of money on it. IOW, its a poor april 1st joke if it is one, though I assume the original story in Chinese was funny. Time to brush up my Mandarine

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

yeah, notice there were a couple people here that got caught by the joke and took it for the gospel truth lol. some ppl might be looking for this kind of story lol. I had a feeling there would be soemhting today.

It's now official.

AMD Officials: No Changes with Model Numbering to Come

April Fool's Day in March Misleads the Web

<A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20040401095926.html" target="_new"> Clicky for anyone to lazy to cut and paste </A>


If I glanced at a spilt box of tooth picks on the floor, could I tell you how many are in the pile. Not a chance, But then again I don't have to buy my underware at Kmart.

thanks for clearing that up lol