Constantine, Re: "so what's the point of quoting the Mhz of a given cpu if it does not tell me what its performance is like?"
Putting megahertz next to a CPU is no better than listing its cache size, or the number of transistors, or the manufacturing process on which it was built. As you say, megahertz does not tell you absolute performance. However, putting megahertz is also no worse than any of the above, and it is a means of differentiating skus.
This is in contrast to QuantiSpeed, which AMD touts is a measurement of "performance". In reality, however, it is just an arbitrary number that puts their CPUs closer to the megahertz speed of their competitor, further convincing people to believe that megahertz equals performance. AMD's first few model numbers were quite convincing, but very slowly, inconsistencies are beginning to surface. Sooner or later, AMD's mistakes will consume the whole system. Whether this means the end to model numbers, or simply a change in their implementation, it remains probable that the outcome will put AMD's subsequent credibility in question.
wbmw |
