Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (53320)	8/31/2001 12:01:30 AM
From: Charles Gryba	Respond to of 275872

>>AMD already does this without ModelHertz. Athlon, Athlon >>4, Athlon MP, Athlon XP, Duron, etc. Tench, those are different beasts. Athlon MP is like the Lincoln Town Car and Athlon XP the LS, Duron is the Ford Focus. I am talking within one model you can have different engines, etc.... ( Don't go across models ). >>ModelHertz is proportional to clock speed, so it's >>obvious AMD wants to equate ModelHertz with performance maybe they do maybe they don't. YOU think it's obvious because you have been trained to think that an so have I. I think the reason they are keeping the numbers similar to P4 numbers is so that people will make the comparison. Personally I would have liked to see their system not even remotely resemble relative P4 Mhz and let whoever cares ( mags, OEM's etc ) figure it out OR if someone asks then come up with whatever benchmarks they want to use to compare themselves to Intel's P4. I vote for changing their speed designations to GT1-GT10 or Mach1 thru 10 or something arbitrary that makes sense ( and sounds good in commercials ) when you compare athlons with each other and NOT the P4. Now, if Intel wants to compare their cpus to AMD's they can come up with an AMD GT rating... :) Constantine