Replies to post #40793 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[Tenchu]

WBMW, Intel has long since erred in marketing megahertz for products with non-similar performance, and people on this forum have been saying so for ages.

What's the "error"? Clock speed is clock speed, useful for comparing two different CPUs in the same family of products. Obviously a Celeron running at 2.6 GHz isn't going to be the same as a P4 running at the same speed.

With Sempron, AMD is once again choosing an arbitrary base of comparison, just like I argued for years now. Remember when ModelHertz was supposed to be compared to the clock speed of the old T-bird (the last Athlons before AMD adopted the model number nonsense)? I guess that only applied to Athlon model numbers. What's Sempron supposed to be compared to, and who's stopping AMD from starting Sempron with a ModelHertz rating of 20 million?

Tenchu

[BUGGI1000]

@WBMW - edited 2.
Oh my, thats boring ... you are writing 1000 posts that
1+1 isn't 2 and you feel great with yourself.
Isn't it strange, that nearly nobody could take you serious
anymore? Mhhh, I must really think, why this has to be so ...

Edit:
Intel has to be in real trouble, when all "Intel-guys" just
appear after months ... a good contrarian indicator?

Edit2:
Must be a boring week, when 1000 posts go further and further
and further and further into MHz/Rating detail. I thought,
we are ALL above that level. Imho laughable - just as a 5 year
old child ... mama, mama, I have lost my lollypop ...

BUGGI