Replies to post #28287 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[Kap]

The model numbers are AMD currency. You don’t want to play games, cut corners and then justify it through wishful thinking arguments. Credibility is hard to earn and easy to trash. The whole point behind the model numbers is that they are a more complete measure of performance then GHz. For example a 2GHz 1MB part can have the same model number as say a 2.4GHz 256KB part regardless of which market segment the part is sold into. Market segments are much more than just CPUs – screen size and resolution in a laptop for example is a more important determinant of a laptop market segment.

[sgolds]

Keith, UpNDown, Doug, yes I agree that product positioning is a very important thing. I also hold to the proposition that this positioning is undermined if the company does not fulfill the promises made, documented and repeated many times.

In other words, it is fine to come up with a scheme that positions well against P4. If AMD finds that it is necessary to use published benchmarks to gain credibility then they have to stick to the standard they established, or update it as needed (i.e., for 64-bit product). Customers don't have to understand how it all works, if they read that some company is cheating on the labeling then they won't buy the product.

Even if it does perform better than a 2.8GHz Celeron. Many people will still take the Celeron if they think the labeling is truthful. It is essential that the customer continues to be told (by friends, press, etc.) that AMD's ratings are truthful.

Remember Cyrix?