You must be confused: 200 / 3600 = 5.5% faster, assuming Intel manages a 3.6 GHz PrescHott by the time AMD releases the 3800+. Besides, even if they extended the margin, it's only a waste if they have trouble binning that high. If they don't, it's just Intel's loss that they've fallen behind.
Re: Ideally they want their products to be percieved as better quality and superior in their capabilites, without throwing a semiconductors cycle worth of R&D investment in the toilet by feeding their own ego's and beating Intel.
Good point. That's what I meant by model numbers being a reactionary scheme by nature.
beating Intel by a big margin in processor speed would be foolish as it would not be maximising their return in investment.
This explanation never gained much traction here among the true believers when it was suggested for the long frequency plateau Northwood experienced. But if it can explain any imminent doldrums in AMD's performance vs time curve I am sure it will enjoy a much more receptive audience. :-P
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
