Replies to post #40749 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[sgolds]

morrowinder, if your numbers are correct (I haven't double checked them) -

We have 3100+ Semprons: 1.8GHZ/256k

Athlon 64: 2GHZ 512k(current version). Wasn't the older version 1.8/1mb. Is this even a close race?

Then either the A64 was underrated, Sempron is overrated, or the new product has efficiencies we don't yet understand (how about other system elements like DRAM speed?). AMD publishes the benchmarks which determine the ratings. If I have time later I will look up the benchmarks on their site.

Too many variables go into the rating to make such a hasty conclusion!

[CombJelly]

"Is it faster than an Athlon 64 3000?"

No. Not that it is relevant. Different product, different niche. Which is faster? A Celeron at 2.4GHz or a Northwood at 2.4GHz? What about a Prescott? Does a FSB of 400, 533 or 800MHz make a difference? What about Dothan? Intel has a zoo of various possibilities. And their new model numbers don't help at all...

[j3pflynn]

morrowinder - C'mon get off the Sempron rating whining already. What you think of it is irrelevant. What the market thinks remains to be seen. It doesn't really matter so much what the consumer "thinks" about it, but how the OEMs/retailers present it. And as long as it continues to toast Celeron, there'll be no problem.

Besides, talk about pot calling the kettle black - are you telling me that any Celeron performs similarly to the equivalently clocked P4? Oh,puleeeeeezzz!!!
Paul