AMD Dual Core Sneak peak info - Page 3 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Monitors, Printers and Peripherals
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 04-14-2005, 01:13 PM   #21 (permalink)
Him
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,190
Send a message via AIM to Him Send a message via Yahoo to Him
Default

And some of you guys are adamantly against Intel. I feel like you are conspiring to kill the intel guy (me) behind my back.

<Looks over shoulder followed by shifty eye shifty eye>
__________________

Him is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 01:58 PM   #22 (permalink)
Off Topic *****
 
Rundat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Gresham Oregon
Posts: 265
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Him
Man, I know people that would emptyt their bank account for that. Question on AMD... Why does AMD rate their processors like they do? I mean, I have an AMD 2400+ but it is 2gHZ. The 2000+ I believe is 1.8 or there around. Why dont they just call a 2.4gHZ cpu a AMD 2400+? There has to be a reason for this.
I was wondering the same thing.
__________________

__________________
Rundat is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 02:11 PM   #23 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 874
Send a message via AIM to YanBooth
Default

One thing that should be considered... When Dual Cores where first mentioned a while ago, AMD said that Dual cores where NOT FOR GAMING. They said to single core FX chips would be the line for gamers...

That may have changed...

What do you think?
__________________
XS RULES!!! I have officially referred you.
YanBooth is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 06:07 PM   #24 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 2,538
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by YanBooth
One thing that should be considered... When Dual Cores where first mentioned a while ago, AMD said that Dual cores where NOT FOR GAMING. They said to single core FX chips would be the line for gamers...

That may have changed...

What do you think?
Depends on the software doesnt it, as things stand right now at this moment if your building an expensive "wintendo" machine, dual cores arent going to do much for you are they?

In about a year to a year and a half when quad core chips hit the market windows wont be ready, just like they werent ready when the 64 bit AMD's hit the market, and even to this day windows still isnt ready IMHO despite the 64 bit patch over job they did to windows.Windows isnt ready for dual cores now really either, its task scheduler sucks, as does its multithreading capability, the hardware coming out is getting way far ahead of the software, with windows OS releases getting further and further apart and not being able to keep up.So either a switch is made to something more suitable or the software just lags for awhile, in either case, as far as wintendo machines go, nope, dual core isnt the new cool thing just yet.
horndude is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 06:09 PM   #25 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,013
Send a message via AIM to DJ-CHRIS
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Him
Man, I know people that would emptyt their bank account for that. Question on AMD... Why does AMD rate their processors like they do? I mean, I have an AMD 2400+ but it is 2gHZ. The 2000+ I believe is 1.8 or there around. Why dont they just call a 2.4gHZ cpu a AMD 2400+? There has to be a reason for this.
Because a 2.4GHZ AMD RAPES a 2.4GHZ p4 and even dale will admit that
DJ-CHRIS is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 06:14 PM   #26 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

Quote:
It's not 4800+, it's 4.8GHZ, dont see why they dont rate it at like 6000+ unless AMD have gotten less efficent
What? It is the 4800+ that's what it's called, it's not 4.8GHz because it's not two 2.4GHz cores working like that so you can't technically consider it working at 4.8GHz at all....it's the equivelant to a 4.8GHz intel, so it'd be pointless to call it a 6000+ since it doesn't perform to a 6Ghz Intel.

Quote:
Man, I know people that would emptyt their bank account for that. Question on AMD... Why does AMD rate their processors like they do? I mean, I have an AMD 2400+ but it is 2gHZ. The 2000+ I believe is 1.8 or there around. Why dont they just call a 2.4gHZ cpu a AMD 2400+? There has to be a reason for this
As chris said basically, it's to help Intel users although all I've ever seen it do is confuse people. It's at 2GHz (if it's an XP and 1.8GHz if it's an XP-M, this being the 2400+ I'm talking about) but it can do the same if not better performance of that of a 2.4GHz Intel chip.......like I said they do that number so if you don't know of AMD chips, you'll be like "Oh it's kind of like a 2.4GHz intel even though it's 2GHz, I got it...cool!!!!!!"

Of course with a name like FX-55 lol and you just see it's 2.6GHz and costing $800+ I guess you'd think AMD is crap and overcharges when in reality that chip is awesome.

4800+ dual core..........that's just amazing
Nubius is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 06:30 PM   #27 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,363
Default

Yep Nubius that's a real beauty. lol.
__________________

Quote:
Ricer: from the latin word Ricarius meaning to suck at everything you attempt.
desiboi is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:36 PM   #28 (permalink)
Him
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,190
Send a message via AIM to Him Send a message via Yahoo to Him
Default

Ohh, so basically AMD is very pretentious.

"We have this chip, and it's only 2 GHz, but it kicks thecrap out of any 2.4 GHz Intel!"
Him is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:50 PM   #29 (permalink)
Grandfather of Techist

\_(ツ)_/
 
Trotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The South
Posts: 31,307
Default

Pretentious? Naw, just honest.

AMDs are a different breed than Intel, even though they perform the same function. The details get really picky, but suffice it to say that AMD tends to do it faster, better, and cooler.

'Nuff said.
__________________


My Rig: SABLE
Antec 300 Illusion / Antec EarthWatts EA650 650W / ASUS GeForce GTX 960 GTX960-DC2OC-2GD5
AMD FX 8320 x8 Black Edition / Gelid Tranquillo / MSI 970A-G43
Sandisk Ultra Plus 128GB / Samsung 840 120GB / WD Black 750GB / WD Green 1TB
2x4GB DDR3 1600 - 2x2GB DDR3 1600
Win10 Ent 64-bit - Mionix Naos 7000 Mouse - CM Storm QuickFire Rapid Mech Keyboard


R.I.P. Danny L. Trotter ... 14 Nov 1945 - 4 Sept 2009
Trotter is offline  
Old 04-14-2005, 08:54 PM   #30 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,433
Default

those things look sweet....

however, im quite happy with my 64 3200+. For now, it'll just go on burning a p4 3.6 (p4 3.8 at half life). when the FX-53 drops in price, ill grab one. For now, the dual cores can stay for servers and workstations.

intel just sucks...they just try to brute force it with their architecture, and AMD is more like the, quicker, slicker, more nimble guy. intel is just a brute.
__________________

__________________





-AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Winchestor
-MSI K8N Neo4-F
-Sapphire Radeon X850 XT
-2x 1024 Corsair XMS Pro

<form action=\"http://www.srsyo.org/tfsearch.php\" method=\"get\">
<input type=\"text\" name=\"search\"><input type=\"submit\" name=\"submit\" value="Search!"></form> Search TF before you post!
dhw200 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.