Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

people who are mad at AMD

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 1, 2001 6:41:28 AM

If your a little mad about AMD and there numbering system(1.4=1600)I think its a great idea. I think this will definately help AMD with it sales which means they will have fatter pockets,more research goes in to better cpus,more competition and these price wars will continue to happen for years to come. You cant beat 1.4ghz athlon for a $100 bucks and to think 2 years ago i bought a 400mhz P2 for $225. And for all you Intel trolls this is not worse then when Intel had all those comercials saying buying and using a p3 will make your internet connection go faster. I say embrace it get ready for more great products from both companys.

More about : people mad amd

a b à CPUs
September 1, 2001 6:51:08 AM

In that case the 1GHz T-Bird should be abou the same speed as a 1.2GHz Tualatin? I think not! In fact it takes a 1.2GHz T-Bird to match a 1.2GHz Tualatin.

I'm so tired of cookies I'd settle for spam!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
September 1, 2001 6:54:03 AM

I'm not mad, I agree with you, it helps those people who just look at mhz=mhz and go, well a 1.6intel is better than a 1.4amd... which if that is all you know about computers then you may be mistaken, and if its an A1600 or an Intel-1600 it looks about the same.. but if all the benchmarks that I've seen are all correct AMD can still say that their A1600 is better than intel's 1600..

but honestly, how I feel... now that AMD is actually a good competitor to Intel I'd rather them not go this route and try to show people how their processor can do more at lower MHz. I think it would show better quality work or atleast give the impression of that...

but then again, apple users have been saying their MHz are much better than Intel's... but no one believes them either...
Related resources
September 1, 2001 6:57:43 AM

Thats true im just very scared of AMD going under not because i hold loyalites but because i dont like overpriced cpus
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
September 1, 2001 7:44:37 AM

Without AMD, Intel would be for the rich instead of just for the well off!

Medication helps :smile:
a b à CPUs
September 1, 2001 7:50:53 AM

Meinen Duetchen ist "nicht zo gut"! But it looks like the Celeron 1.1GHz they tested was the old castrated Coppermine of yore. And that the 1.2GHz Tualatin Celeron won't be avialable for testing for several months.

I'm so tired of cookies I'd settle for spam!
September 1, 2001 8:02:38 AM

Now thats odd they never got a p3 to anything over a gig, until the die shrink and the tully core, so this is you say a coppermine core celeron at 1.1 gig and .18 micron? Or a coppermine core non-tully at .13 ( didn't know they existed) please clarify.

Video editing?? Ha, I don't even own a camera!
September 1, 2001 10:06:00 AM

I don't think it's a good idea.
I think it will give AMD bashers more fodder to sling around.
AMD should invest in high impact advertising proving their lower MHz processors perform as well as Intel's higher MHz processors.


<font color=green>I do whatever my Rice Krispies tell me!</font color=green>
September 1, 2001 12:53:44 PM

The PR rating is for Palomino, Crash, not T-Bird. Palomino is 5% or more increase in performance, clock for clock, than T-Bird, and in a number of benchmarks is significantly higher performing.

Conversely, for the P4 to match Tualatin in performance you would need somewhere around a P4 1.5 to match a Tually 1.2

In addition, the benchmarks of the Athlon Tbird I've seen when compared to Tually matches or betters Tually in all benchmarks except SSE optimization at like clock speeds. And, since Tually is still hindered by the 133 mhz memory architecture, it tends to fall behind in memory intensive benchmarks...as well as FPU apparently.

Not to be argumentative, just showing the *other* side o the coin.

Finally, if you read this article at Van's Hardware:

<A HREF="http://www.vanshardware.com/articles/2001/august/010831..." target="_new">http://www.vanshardware.com/articles/2001/august/010831...;/A>

You may get ome interesting insight as to why AMD may actually be creating this rating system to begin with.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
September 1, 2001 1:01:48 PM

One last note on the Tually vs Athlon PR rating....

This is an inappropriate comparison since Tually is intended mostly for mobile market, is VERY expensive even compared to low end P4's. The Tually Cellery will offer less horsepower than the Tually-M, so benching a Cellery against an Athlon would still be advantage Athlon.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
a b à CPUs
September 1, 2001 4:19:14 PM

I doubt that. The Tually Celery is supposed to come out with all the features of a regular (256k) Tually PIII, just lower bus speed. So it will loose at stock clock, but overclocked to 12x133.3 (1600), it should compare well to the T-bird overclocked the same (12x133.3=1600). This is because the 1.2GHz Tually 256k PIII (9x133.3) compares so well to the 1.2GHz Athlon "C".

Since most of us are overclockers, and since 1600 is close to the limmit for T-Birds, I think a 1600@133 v. 1600@133 comparison for the Tually Celeron is legitamate. Whereas experience has shown that such a test would provide the T-Bird with only a slight lead at best.

I'm so tired of cookies I'd settle for spam!
a b à CPUs
September 1, 2001 4:42:08 PM

Remember that when they initially released the Coppermine, they could not even get it to 1GHz, but closer manufacturing tolerances allowed them to get that far. Similar things happened with the T-Bird, the early ones wouldn't go much past 1.2GHz.
So the article stated that the 1.1GHz Celeron was using the old .18 micron Coppermine core, it is possible that manufacturing refinements have provided better yields, as many Celeron 733 owners are already overclocked to 1.1GHz.

I'm so tired of cookies I'd settle for spam!
September 1, 2001 4:42:09 PM

PR was a horrible idea AMD should out let it die when they killed off the K5.

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... :smile: Yummy :smile:
September 1, 2001 5:34:29 PM

crashman, we all know that a 1.2 w/512k oc'd to 1.4 gave the 1.4tbird a good fight-but not quite. so, then will this 1.2 tualatin = 1.4 in AMD's PRHz?



"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
September 1, 2001 7:24:26 PM

Quote:
I doubt that. The Tually Celery is supposed to come out with all the features of a regular (256k) Tually PIII, just lower bus speed. So it will loose at stock clock, but overclocked to 12x133.3 (1600), it should compare well to the T-bird overclocked the same (12x133.3=1600). This is because the 1.2GHz Tually 256k PIII (9x133.3) compares so well to the 1.2GHz Athlon "C".

but it loses huge on price, a better comparison will be the pally @1.5-1.7 thrown on a SIS chipset with DDR.....Tully still loses big.

At best the Tully is a very limited lifetime chip( but interesting I might add) ....any idea how high intel intends to ramp this chip? I highly doubt we will ever see one ( stock) at above 1.4 gig. to bad intel finds it neccesary to way overcharge for it ( compared to there p4's)


Video editing?? Ha, I don't even own a camera!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Ncogneto on 09/01/01 03:26 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
a b à CPUs
September 1, 2001 9:47:17 PM

Hoping the Tually Celery goes for about the same price as the T-Bird, and it should overclock to about the same speeds as tht T-Bird, and both should perform close to evenly at 12x133. In actuality I expect that the Tually Celery will sell for about 15% more than the T-Bird and perform about 5% slower overall. But it allows people to maintain Intel chipsets, with a "similar speed at a similar price" processor. I see the Tually Celery as being a great value, and expect all Tuallies to end at around 1.4GHz stock speed, probably being droped around the end of next year.

I'm so tired of cookies I'd settle for spam!
a b à CPUs
September 1, 2001 9:54:26 PM

AMD's PR rating will of coarse compare itself to Intel's worst clock-for-clock performing chip. So that would make the Tually PIII 1.2GHz a PR1400 as well, according to AMD's method. Further, even if the Northwood provided a 25% improvement over the Willy, the Athlon would be compared to the Willy, not the Northwood, in it's PR rating. Which add further fuel to the argument of AMD being a dishonest company. In fact I'm still a little hot under the collar about their "266" FSB. Great technology marketed by an inept company.

I'm so tired of cookies I'd settle for spam!
September 2, 2001 12:17:25 AM

Well Crash, it will certainly be interesting to see similar clock Tually Celeon and Athlon or Durons put side by side. I suspect that Tually Celeron will get about enough performance boost to even out performance with Duron at the same clockspeed. I have serious doubts that it will meet the performance level of Athlon with Athlons far superior FPU. BUT, we'll probably know soon...as soon as some reviewers have put it through its' paces:>

MArk-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
a b à CPUs
September 2, 2001 12:51:34 AM

It's soley dependant on weather the Celly will be the full 256k version of the Tualatin, or a scaled back 128k version. Also, it will be dependant on overclocking to achieve the 133FSB, which should also be done with a "B" Athlon in order to make it fair.
Of course the hardware sites will review it at it's stock 100FSB, which will reduce performance dramatically, as Intel inteded. Such benchmarks do not show the value of a chip for overclockers, but I'm sure their will be pleanty of AMD trolls in here pointing to the stock bechmarks (Athlon C 1200 v Celeron 1200), instead of the overclocked benchmarks (Athlon B 1200 overclocked to 1600/133 v. Celly 1200 overclocked to 1600/133), to make some irrational argument.

I'm so tired of cookies I'd settle for spam!
September 2, 2001 2:40:43 AM

Hmmm....I thought we were comparing *stock* cpu to *stock* CPU..not tweaked to tweaked.

Stock Palomino compared to Stock Tually Celeron or Stock Morgan Duron (current Duron) to stock Tually Celeron.

No messing with upping the FSB beyond what the stock CPU is rated for, etc.

Now you're trying to change the game by overclocking Celeron to try to match Athlon (which it won't do because Pally will OC higher than Tually Celeron will I suspect. But now we're getting waay off reality since neither (Current 1.1 and 1.0 Cleerons are not Tually accordign to you I think) and Pally desktop chip isn't released either. So, until they are we're just blowing so much hot air on which will be faster or higher performing.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
a b à CPUs
September 2, 2001 3:15:53 AM

No. I said from the beginning that it would make a good choice for overclocking. The PIII Taulatin is already at 133FSb and already matching the T-Bird in many benchmarks. But for less money you will be able to get the 1.2GHz Celeron with 100FSB. Now everyone knows that 100MHz just won't do for memory. So you overclock it to 1600, Tuallies can take it. But then how do you make the comparison fair? By setting the T-Bird to 1600/133 as well.
So what am I proposing? That the Tually Celeron, when overclocked to 133FSB, becomes a PIII Tually 1600. For a whole lot less money.
I don't know very many gamers who don't overclock.
This is all contigent on our best information of the Tually Celeron, to be true. Which is that it will be supplied with the full 256k cache.
Oh, and don't get upset about my Radeon LE at retail spec either.

I'm so tired of cookies I'd settle for spam!
!