todd

Is there like a rule, pattern, equation, or something that lets you find out what the Intel GHz speed equivilant of an AMD chip, or vice versa?

Does it have anything to do with the name of the AMD chip?
For example, is the Athlon 64 3800 a 3.8 GHz in Pentium terms?

This is something i've always been confused about, and would like to understand. I also just built a new system and got the Athlon 64 4000+. I chose this processor basically beause it looked fast. It ranked in the top 3 of all of the benchmark tests I looked at, and was perfect for my price range. I'm just curious to know what the Pentium equivilant of this chip (runs 2.4 GHz in AMD terms) would be as far as frequency speed goes. My previously stated 'name theory' doesn't work too well in this case, because I find it extremely hard to believe that this chip would be a 4.0, seeing as it was only $460.

I don't know much at all about the hard core mechanics of how processors work underneath their name and frequency speed.

soccerchamp76

The naming scheme has always been friendly to Intel recently because of the clock speed advantage they had. AMD countered using the system 2800+, etc. This means, that if a processor has a rating of 4000+, it should have the speed equivalent to that of a 4.0GHz Pentium 4.
The reasoning being the difference in the way the processors are made, the front side busses, the cache size, and other items.

I could be wrong, but the general consensus for processors is that AMD processors are better "processor bang-for-you-buck" than Intel processors. AMD excels in gamign situations while Intel excels in multimedia capabilities (due to the clock speed).
If you do video editing, a P4 would be helpful. If you do hardcore gaming, a AMD FX-55 would be helpful. If you are an everyday consumer, a AMD 64 3500+(or other number) would be best.
^- my .02


P.S. I have a Pentium 4 3.2GHz Prescott processor in my computer that I built and I love every aspect of it except for the heat....goddamn hot Prescotts.

__________________
Brian Griffin: Ah, if my memory serves me, this is the physics department.
Chris Griffin: That would explain all the gravity.

jvwgtr

The AMD naming scheme is supposed to help you compareits performance level to an Intel. You're correct: the 4000+ should perform like an Intel 4.0 ghz processor.

The "actual" clock speed of the AMD CPU is much less than 4ghz, because of its internal architecture.
In simplified terms, the AMD CPU can do in about 12 steps what the Intel processor needs 20-something steps to do. So an Intel processor would have to work many times faster (higher clock speed) to complete the same task, because it takes more steps to arrive at the same conclusion.

That's why AMD adopted their naming scheme, so it would be easier to figure out that a 3800+ would give you the same performance of a 3.8ghz Intel, even though the actual speed would be 2.6ghz or something.

And yes, they're that much cheaper than Intel, which makes them a very popular choice. If you can get the same performance at slower clock speeds (less heat, less power consumption) for less money...it makes sense, right?

MikeSty

Or even better performance I've got a prescott at 3.0ghz ( I clock it up occasionally), and damn it gets hot! I can keep it under 40*C now (idle), which isn't too bad.

Intel putting DRM on-chip scares me so I don't think I'm going to buy Intel for some time...

cyrnel

No kidding. You have to wonder how this will affect their marketing to enthusiasts for both the Pentium D's and chipsets. Watch for Award/AMI to release chipsets to disable the feature entirely.

Reminds me of their on-chip serial number fiasco in the late 90's.

__________________
There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195

Slavakion

Weren't chip manufacturers thinking of switching to some ridiculous new naming scheme involving categories? It was something equivalent to car makes, like the "S3 class chip" or something. I'll see if I can find something about it.

soccerchamp76

You are referring to the current naming scheme of the Intel chips.
The 3xx series are the Celeron's and lower power processors. The 5xx series are the normal desktop processors and the 7xx series were the Intel Centrino processors for laptops. The 6xx series introduced 64-bit computing and the 8xx series introduced dual-core processing.
AMD is continuing their name scheme even with their dual-core chips, which are going to be released at 4200+, 4400+, 4600+, and 4800+ for the most expensive dualcore chip. The 4200+ and 4400+ run at the same clock speed but the latter has twice as much L2 cache. The same goes for the 4600+ and 4800+.

__________________
Brian Griffin: Ah, if my memory serves me, this is the physics department.
Chris Griffin: That would explain all the gravity.

todd

Your explanation helped a lot, jvwgtr. I get it now, thanks a lot guys.