AMD what!!??? :confused:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sonikbaby

Baseband Member
Messages
24
OK i just bought a new computer online..


BUt now I realize I don't know much about the AMD statistic...



What I ended up getting was the (939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 3000+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology...

IT DOESNT TELL MY THE MHRZ THOUGH.. I ASSumed
that ment 3.0mhrz


But I think I might be confused...


the other options I had for CPU was

939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 FX 55 CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology [+750]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 4000+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology [+526]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 3800+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology [+296]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 3500+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology [+116]
(939-pin) AMD ATHLON64 3200+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology [+50]


What are the diffrences???

and I looked at the AMD website..

and they have these diffrent CPUs listed..

AMD Opteron™

AMD Athlon™ 64

AMD Sempron™

AMD Athlon™


What are the diffrences with these???



AMD noob...


:confused:
 
The AMD64 3000 runs at 1.8ghz. With 1.6ghz HTT. AMD64 HTT is like Intel FSB. Its a little easier to understand that way. Why did you buy a computer, if you dident know anything about it.....?

All those other CPU are different types.
 
AMD Opteron™
Their server CPU


AMD Athlon™ 64
Their gamer line CPU \ Everything

AMD Sempron™
Their budget CPU

AMD Athlon™
Their old gamer line CPU \ Everything. Also mobile's are still plain athlon
 
If you are bummed about buying a 1.8GHz 3000+ processor...don't be! The whole GHz/MHz rating is VERY misleading. An AMD 64-bit processor at 1.8GHz, with HTT of 1600MHz, is just as good as a 3.0GHz rated chip from Intel performance wise.

AMD processors are more efficient...so they don't need as many MHz to do as much work, Intels sport lots of MHz (marketing advantage...bigger # is looked at as faster) but it does just as much work as an AMD clocked LOWER because it
's not as efficient.

They are both good processors...just when a first time AMD customer sees they bought a slower MHz processor for the same price as an Intel that LOOKS 2X as fast...they usually are bummed. No worries...your 3000+ packs a punch and is an excellent gaming and regular application processor.
 
Yeah if you want proof, then check out the thread regarding an Intel processor having to be 5.2GHz compared to an AMD Fx-55 at 2.6GHz and the Intel barely beats it out.

Intel uses numbers for marketing, but don't read into it. That 1.8GHz you got is equivelant to 3GHz or more Intel chip.
 
ya know....i think amd's losin' out on a even larger market share...all because of their technology too.....like, don't get me wrong...i'm a amd fanboy myself, but the average person going to buy a computer will see a 1.8-2.2ghz 3XXX+, only look at the ghz, see that it's as high at it goes, and go buy an intel because they have a 3.8 or something.

it's just like megadeth.....better than metallica but just not reconized....*shakes head*
 
4W4K3 said:
If you are bummed about buying a 1.8GHz 3000+ processor...don't be! The whole GHz/MHz rating is VERY misleading. An AMD 64-bit processor at 1.8GHz, with HTT of 1600MHz, is just as good as a 3.0GHz rated chip from Intel performance wise.

AMD processors are more efficient...so they don't need as many MHz to do as much work, Intels sport lots of MHz (marketing advantage...bigger # is looked at as faster) but it does just as much work as an AMD clocked LOWER because it
's not as efficient.

They are both good processors...just when a first time AMD customer sees they bought a slower MHz processor for the same price as an Intel that LOOKS 2X as fast...they usually are bummed. No worries...your 3000+ packs a punch and is an excellent gaming and regular application processor.

Exactly... Yeah I Don't believe in big clock rates.. I work for Sun microsystems. .Building there SUPER servers..


and they highest there CPUS come at is 1.2 ghrz!!


haha .. yeah it means nothing... only takes up more power and runs hotter!



I DO know something about computers..

I know that I wanted a AMD... Since this will be a gaming system mostly. But I am unfamilier with what their products are since I havent bought one before...

So...

Whats the diffrence with the 3200+'s though??

I heard that the only diffrence between the 3000 and the 3200 is the L2 cache is 512 vs 1meg???
 
This info is for the new SKT 939's only
3200's are 1.8ghz
3000's are 2.0ghz

However, the 1 meg l2 cache processors are an antique core. Also SKT 754 AMD's have a higher clockspeed, but dont have the SKT 939 advantages
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom