TWY, Re: "AMD is not attempting to serve the industry. And they shouldn't be. They should and are aiming to serve the consumer."
I don't think I could ever get you to see eye to eye with me, so I'm not going to try. All I'll say, though, is that some people believe that serving the consumer is best accomplished by first serving the industry. Right now, AMD's model number system is no better than megahertz. It simply assigns arbitrary numbers per sku. So does megahertz, for that matter, but at least megahertz is accepted as an industry standard. Various companies aren't going to be interested in abandoning megahertz, just so they can use yet another arbitrary measurement. What AMD needs to do is come up with something far more convincing that is based on real performance. Something based on SpecInt, while incomplete in reflecting overall performance, would at least be better than QuantiSpeed. It would serve the consumer by showing them a real metric for performance (even if it isn't the best metric), and it would also serve the industry, by giving a basis for comparison. There's really no way to relate AMD's model numbers to performance, except to relate it to Intel's Pentium 4 megahertz, and that's just plain idiotic, if the whole point of creating model numbers was to debunk Intel's megahertz.
wbmw |
