The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I was reading your review of the AMD Athlon XP 1900+ and cannot help to comment on this
Vibe wrote:
>How does it work? I've heard loadsa stories about the new XP's, but how can a 1500MHz AMD run at the same frequency as a 1800MHz P4. Are AMD just pulling our leg to get our money?? I think so!! It's a good sturdy working chip though. I would recommend it as it is cheaper than the supposed P4 equivalent.
Simply, no, AMD are not pulling your leg, I have an XP 1700 (1.46GHz) and it benchmarks better than a P4 2.0GHz in SiSoft SANDRA 2002 Pro
The reason for AMD's naming is that clock frequency is no longer a reliable speed calculation due to different processor architecture giving different performance at lower speeds, therefore an AMD 1.67GHz will easily outperform a P4 2.0 so therefore it is called the Athlon 2000+
The + bit is because it may give even higher than 2000MHz performance
Vibe wrote:
>How does it work? I've heard loadsa stories about the new XP's, but how can a 1500MHz AMD run at the same frequency as a 1800MHz P4. Are AMD just pulling our leg to get our money?? I think so!! It's a good sturdy working chip though. I would recommend it as it is cheaper than the supposed P4 equivalent.
Simply, no, AMD are not pulling your leg, I have an XP 1700 (1.46GHz) and it benchmarks better than a P4 2.0GHz in SiSoft SANDRA 2002 Pro
The reason for AMD's naming is that clock frequency is no longer a reliable speed calculation due to different processor architecture giving different performance at lower speeds, therefore an AMD 1.67GHz will easily outperform a P4 2.0 so therefore it is called the Athlon 2000+
The + bit is because it may give even higher than 2000MHz performance
Quantispeed technology!
c.b.
c.b.
Er.
The XP1900 runs at 1.6ghz.
As for the speed thing, it's to do with instructions per clock really (IPC). A P4 does 6 IPC, an AthlonXP does 9 IPC. Seeing as instructions is what really matters, you do the maths.
Plus, AthlonXPs are just better at doing most things than P4s.
The XP1900 runs at 1.6ghz.
As for the speed thing, it's to do with instructions per clock really (IPC). A P4 does 6 IPC, an AthlonXP does 9 IPC. Seeing as instructions is what really matters, you do the maths.
Plus, AthlonXPs are just better at doing most things than P4s.
I was reading your review of the AMD Athlon XP 1900+ and cannot help to comment on this
Vibe wrote:
>How does it work? I've heard loadsa stories about the new XP's, but how can a 1500MHz AMD run at the same frequency as a 1800MHz P4. Are AMD just pulling our leg to get our money?? I think so!! It's a good sturdy working chip though. I would recommend it as it is cheaper than the supposed P4 equivalent.
Simply, no, AMD are not pulling your leg, I have an XP 1700 (1.46GHz) and it benchmarks better than a P4 2.0GHz in SiSoft SANDRA 2002 Pro
The reason for AMD's naming is that clock frequency is no longer a reliable speed calculation due to different processor architecture giving different performance at lower speeds, therefore an AMD 1.67GHz will easily outperform a P4 2.0 so therefore it is called the Athlon 2000+
The + bit is because it may give even higher than 2000MHz performance
Vibe wrote:
>How does it work? I've heard loadsa stories about the new XP's, but how can a 1500MHz AMD run at the same frequency as a 1800MHz P4. Are AMD just pulling our leg to get our money?? I think so!! It's a good sturdy working chip though. I would recommend it as it is cheaper than the supposed P4 equivalent.
Simply, no, AMD are not pulling your leg, I have an XP 1700 (1.46GHz) and it benchmarks better than a P4 2.0GHz in SiSoft SANDRA 2002 Pro
The reason for AMD's naming is that clock frequency is no longer a reliable speed calculation due to different processor architecture giving different performance at lower speeds, therefore an AMD 1.67GHz will easily outperform a P4 2.0 so therefore it is called the Athlon 2000+
The + bit is because it may give even higher than 2000MHz performance