i have just been curious as to why amd has changed their naming system. they had that 5 digit system that no one liked and then they changed it to pretty much the same as intel. doesn't intel have a i7 920 and amd have a phenom II 920? and both have a 940 as well? i haven't followed nehalem but if that is true it could be confusing.
I think it's a great idea. Maybe AMD's numbers match the performance of the Intel products. That makes it easier for the average joe when making a purchase. This way people will know what time of performance to expect. Well, a ball park figure atleast.Originally Posted by roofsniper
Well it would be nice if we could expect A940 to perform like I940 but I dont see that happening. Of course thow it wouldnt be the first time they named there CPU's to reflect Intel's equal like the Athlon64 started out. a 3000+ was comparable to Intel's 3000mhz P4.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Yeah, I agree. I would love to see a Phenom II 940 BE within performance reach of a 940 i7. That would make things VERY interesting. I'm doubtful overall, but after the 4800 series and SB740, I don't know what to expect from ATI/AMD. I'm glad you made reference to the old A64 series. That was the reason I posted what I did. We will all know in Jan. what the Denebs can really do, but looking at all the praise around the net it seems to be a worthy contender. I doubt AMD end up with egg on their face this time.
They've had tooooo much time. They have to bring the noise this round or they will be in serious trouble. Overall, I just want the 940 to be faster than my overclocked Q6600(3.1Ghz) setup. If AMD pulls that off then I will be satisfied.
Last edited by Throwed; 12-03-2008 at 02:52 PM.
It might perform close to or on par with in a lot of apps./. But like back in the A64 days.. Intel still had the multithreaded apps but AMD matched or most of the time beat the intel counter parts... but I guess we will know when ever NDA is lifted.. even if it isn't as fast as i7.. it isn't the end of the world.. it just has to match or beat the price/performance area..
Last edited by charged3800z24; 12-03-2008 at 07:43 PM.
~1~
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
GigaByte X570 AORUS LITE
Trident-Z 3200 CL14 16GB
AMD Radeon VII
~2~
AMD Ryzen ThreadRipper 2950x
Asus Prime X399-A
GSkill Flare-X 3200mhz, CAS14, 64GB
AMD RX 5700 XT
They have done it to confuse the public and make them think they are equivalent performing chips.
I'm surprised they went with Phenom II and not something like the Phenom i8(because 8 is greater than 7).
Well the Athlon days were the same way, AMD's numbering system at the time reflected the comparable speeds at which the chip would perform based on Intel's product. While I doubt that AMD can match the speeds for multithreaded apps that i7 can do as long as it's close it's a win in my book. The average consumer doesn't need all the horsepower these chips have anyway and a P2 and a i7 chip in a desktop these days no one will ever know the difference in performance anyway.They have done it to confuse the public and make them think they are equivalent performing chips.
I'm surprised they went with Phenom II and not something like the Phenom i8(because 8 is greater than 7).
They're damned if they do (9XX), and they're damned if they don't (2XXXX).They have done it to confuse the public and make them think they are equivalent performing chips.
I'm surprised they went with Phenom II and not something like the Phenom i8(because 8 is greater than 7).
Oddly enough, one could say they are doing that with existing Phenoms, but no one seems to discuss it in those terms, so maybe it is less important than it use to be in the days of the high mhz/poor IPC of the P4, when AMD first started with a naming convention.
What does it matter anyway,
If people seriously fall for the same naming from both Intel and AMD then they deserve it, it's called darwinism IMO. Such people should just get a Dell or whatever.
Synaptic Overflow
CPU:
-Intel Core i7 920 3841A522
--CPU: 4200Mhz| Vcore: +120mV| Uncore: 3200Mhz| VTT: +100mV| Turbo: On| HT: Off
---CPU block: EK Supreme Acetal| Radiator: TCF X-Changer 480mm
Motherboard:
-Foxconn Bloodrage P06
--Blck: 200Mhz| QPI: 3600Mhz
Graphics:
-Sapphire Radeon HD 4870X2
--GPU: 750Mhz| GDDR: 900Mhz
RAM:
-3x 2GB Mushkin XP3-12800
--Mhz: 800Mhz| Vdimm: 1.65V| Timings: 7-8-7-20-1T
Storage:
-3Ware 9650SE-2LP RAID controller
--2x Western Digital 74GB Raptor RAID 0
PSU:
-Enermax Revolution 85+ 1250W
OS:
-Windows Vista Business x64
ORDERED: Sapphire HD 5970 OC
LOOKING FOR: 2x G.Skill Falcon II 128GB SSD, Windows 7
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks