New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AMD naming

post #1 of 11
8/16/04 at 7:55pm
Thread Starter 
so if it say amd 3400+, does that mean i performs like a 3.4ghz pentium?
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 11
8/16/04 at 7:57pm
you betcha. look at my 3dmark01 score.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 11
8/16/04 at 8:01pm
no its not the same AMD have separated themselves from the ghz myth, the 3400+ runs at 2.2 ghz (i think) their name have nothing to do with their clock speed. BUTTTTTTTTTTTTT it performs far better than the best Pentium out there (including the 3.6 ghz ee).
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 11
8/16/04 at 8:03pm
It does? I didn't know they even had a 3.6 ee out yet.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 11
8/16/04 at 8:06pm
Thread Starter 
that was my question tho - i thought that 3400+ amd (@2.2ghz) matched a p4 @ 3.4 ghz.
3000+ matched a p4 @ 3ghz
2800+ matched a p4 @ 2.8ghz
i guess not then.
anyways i gotta decide by tonite between a p4 @ 2.8ghz, p4 HT @3ghz, and amd 64 3400+.
leaning towards 2.8 ghz pentium :P
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 11
8/16/04 at 8:06pm
im sure i saw it somewhere in a benchmark comparison.

hum oh well it beats the best that intell can throw at it.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 11
8/16/04 at 8:08pm
amd 64 3400+ would be massivly better, it'd blast a p4 2.8 out of the water and into orbit.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 11
8/16/04 at 8:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyoha45
that was my question tho - i thought that 3400+ amd (@2.2ghz) matched a p4 @ 3.4 ghz.
3000+ matched a p4 @ 3ghz
2800+ matched a p4 @ 2.8ghz
i guess not then.
anyways i gotta decide by tonite between a p4 @ 2.8ghz, p4 HT @3ghz, and amd 64 3400+.
leaning towards 2.8 ghz pentium :P
That is the way the AMD naming schemes work. It performs equivalent to an Intel chip with that clock speed. You were exactly correct.

BTW I'd go for the AMD64 hands down.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 11
8/16/04 at 8:09pm
The comparison was supposed to be based on a Thunderbird 1.4GHz IIRC (ie a Tbird would have to run at 1600 to run like this chip, so the chip got a 1600+ rating).

It wasn't supposed to compare to Intel, but we know what happened.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 11
8/16/04 at 8:17pm
Thread Starter 
thanks for the replies!

btw, the amd 64 lappy has a worse video card (its compaq r3000z v r3000t) and due to the lack of 64 bit apps, i think the p4 comp. is more practical.

heh, actually i dont even know wat ill use it for (first year engineering student)...
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 11
8/16/04 at 8:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyoha45
thanks for the replies!

btw, the amd 64 lappy has a worse video card (its compaq r3000z v r3000t) and due to the lack of 64 bit apps, i think the p4 comp. is more practical.

heh, actually i dont even know wat ill use it for (first year engineering student)...
From what I've heard, 64bit gives you advantages even a 32bit world. Also, it would seem that, considering we're talking "practical" here, the 64bit is the better processor.


Practical Reasons why:

1) It outperforms comparable Intel processors while arguably providing better battery life.

2) AMD is historically priced cheaper than comparable Intel (because they just don't have the industry "standard" name).

3) It is exceedingly practical to buy something that is future proof. A year (or two) from now when 64bit applications start entering the mainstream, the P4 will be considerably more outdated than the AMD64.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Notebook Forums - General