The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Just to make sure I'm just not looking hard enough, it's not possible to get a P3/4 750MHZ laptop for under £200 (first or second hand), is it?
Didn't think so.
Didn't think so.
[URL]http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?newsid=2796&page=1&pagepos=3[/URL]
[URL]http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_3734_11672,00.html[/URL]
I don't think that's specifically where I read it, but the top link mentions the 25% performance increase (although, admittedly, it doesn't actually say a 25% increase over equivalent Intel CPUs).
[URL]http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_3734_11672,00.html[/URL]
I don't think that's specifically where I read it, but the top link mentions the 25% performance increase (although, admittedly, it doesn't actually say a 25% increase over equivalent Intel CPUs).
Well, I definitely read that somewhere, but I'm admittedly not sure about the reliability of the source.
At the very least, I'm certain the reason for the "+" is AMD indicating that their architecture allows greater performance than what you would expect from that clock frequency. It's probably on their website.
At the very least, I'm certain the reason for the "+" is AMD indicating that their architecture allows greater performance than what you would expect from that clock frequency. It's probably on their website.
If you compare the benchmarks for the original Athlon XPs against the Pentium 4 Williamettes of the time, the Athlon XP utterly destroyed it, even with similar ratings.
AMD incidentally don't claim anything against Intel chips. Officially it is compared to the 1.4 GHz Athlon, the last one measured solely be clock speed. So they don't claim a 25% performance increase over equivalent Intel chips. There is a slight increase in some of them, but not as much as that. 10% is probably a tad optimistic in that regard.
AMD incidentally don't claim anything against Intel chips. Officially it is compared to the 1.4 GHz Athlon, the last one measured solely be clock speed. So they don't claim a 25% performance increase over equivalent Intel chips. There is a slight increase in some of them, but not as much as that. 10% is probably a tad optimistic in that regard.
AMD don't use the MHz rating as they feel it undermines the performance of their processors. While an Athlon XP1600+ is said to be the same as a P4 running at 1.6GHz, they claim (so take this with a pinch of salt) a 25% increase in performance over the Intel equivalent, which is the reason for the "+".
That's what I assumed, but I just wanted to make sure it wasn't a smart way of covering up a lowly 330MHZ.
:D
Thanks.
:D
Thanks.
The number roughly corresponds to how it performs compared to an Intel equivalent. So an XP1600+ is roughly comparable to a P4 1.6GHz. That's the easiest way to think of it.
Also, what's Athlon XP1600+ ? Or Athlon 3200?
I imagine it's a processor speed, so what's it's MHZ equivalent?
Cheers.
I imagine it's a processor speed, so what's it's MHZ equivalent?
Cheers.
Just to make sure I'm just not looking hard enough, it's not possible to get a P3/4 750MHZ laptop for under £200 (first or second hand), is it?
Didn't think so.
Didn't think so.