Replies to post #28245 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[j3pflynn]

wbmw - re:"AMD has already proven in the past that model numbers mean absolutely nothing. They are 100% PR, and I don't mean "Performance Rating", either."
That's not quite true, wbmw. Whenever they've had either performance parity or the lead in performance, PR has been accurate to conservative. The only time AMD degraded the PR was when Northwood was clocking way higher and AMD had fallen behind in performance. Anyone who is claiming that the situation is similar now with K8 is either foolish, uninformed, living in an alternate reality, or being disingenuous.

I'm not necessarily supporting Doug's point re: increased IPC, either, that could be a result of other factors - such as the fact that it's mobiles we're talking about here.
Paul

[Kap]

<Doug, Re: The specs *are* 1.6 GHz, 256K L2, 3000+. So if you trust the 3000+ rating, what does that imply about the IPC w.r.t. the standard K8 core? Did you put *any* thought into your answer?

AMD has already proven in the past that model numbers mean absolutely nothing. They are 100% PR>

3000+ is a marketing blunder, I hope they fix it ASAP. There is no IPC improvement in the part.