As if Keeping up with the Processor's wasn't complicated enough..
 

now Intel went ahead and totally changed their nomenclature. And the processor "number" has nothing to do with how fast it runs, what FSB it has, or anything!!!!

Damnit, this is annoying. Fockers!!

Anyway, here is the link to their new naming scheme. Memorize it, there will be a test at the end of the day. hehe :crazy:

http://www.intel.com/products/processor_number/info.htm

amd has been doing something similar for a year or so...

my athlon xp 1900+ has a stock speed of 1600mhz

ive found it really annoying...

Yeah, Intel switched to this naming scheme a couple of months ago. I guess they had to after changing cores and sockets with many of their processors retaining the same clock speeds.

JStrider, Athlon XPs are named after their Intel counterparts. Your Athlon XP 1900+ is named 1900+ because it's the equivalent of a 1.9 GHz Pentium 4 even though it's only 1.6 GHz. AMD has to do this because non-computer savvy people will believe that a 1900 MHz P4 is faster than a 1600 MHz. Not the case!

-Lasereth

yeah....that's the thing...at least AMD's naming scheme made sense, as lasereth explained.

what intel has done is cocky poo poo :lol:

the only problem i have with AMD's nomenclature is that it doesn't correspond well with intel anymore.

it would be nice if it was a Nice scheme, not this "thing" they pass off.

uh, if they think they're gonna win the market over with this one, they have another thing comin...

That numbering scheme makes absolutely NO sense.

You good processors are 5xx while your lesser processors are 7xx? Yeah, the public's gonna take real well to that one.

I believe this is a move by Intel to force Athlon to redo their system.

I hope they don't.

AMD and Intel are both screwed when it comes to naming schemes. Ever since the late Athlon XPs and P4's came out the naming scheme has been off. Now it's getting much, much worse. Just look at AMD's Athlon XP 3200+...I don't think so.

The introduction of the Prescott and Barton cores have really screwed up the system. When comparing AMD processors to Intel processors, now ya have to take into account the core of the processor and the direct competition for the other company. You can't compare a Sempron to a P4...nope, it's Sempron to Celeron D. Athlon XP Thoroughbred core to P4 Northwood non-HT. Athlon XP Barton to P4 HT. Athlon 64 non-FX to the late cache-boosted P4's, and the Athlon 64 FX to the P4 EE. It gets really complicated!

-Lasereth

Actually, 'good' processors are 5xx. 'lesser' processors are 3xx (celerons). Mobile processors w/ centrino are 7xx. You're not likely to do much comparison between a 7xx and anything else. Other than the celeron M processors which are also 3xx's.

I am getting excited over their dual-core pentiums, now wont that be powerful.