AMD what!!??? :confused: - 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 02-27-2005, 09:37 PM   #1 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 24
Default AMD what!!??? :confused:

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...


__________________

Sonikbaby is offline  
Old 02-27-2005, 09:45 PM   #2 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,088
Default

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.
__________________

__________________
Finished With TF.
Codeine is offline  
Old 02-27-2005, 09:53 PM   #3 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,013
Send a message via AIM to DJ-CHRIS
Default

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
DJ-CHRIS is offline  
Old 02-27-2005, 11:01 PM   #4 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,046
Send a message via AIM to 4W4K3
Default

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.
__________________
<marquee scrollamount=\"1\" scrolldelay=\"8\" direction=\"up\" width=\"400\" height=\"65\" style=\"font-family: Verdana; font-size: 8pt\">
Compaq Presario V5000 laptop
¯\\(º_o)/¯</marquee>
4W4K3 is offline  
Old 02-27-2005, 11:04 PM   #5 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

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.
Nubius is offline  
Old 02-27-2005, 11:09 PM   #6 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
majistic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,434
Default

Very well put.
__________________
majistic is offline  
Old 02-27-2005, 11:31 PM   #7 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
CntdwnToExtn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Parents Basement...Still
Posts: 1,746
Send a message via MSN to CntdwnToExtn
Default

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*
__________________
[110.7896] Getting up from chair
[112.8798] Walking to fridge
[118.5234] Opening Fridge
[119.1439] CntdwnToExtn panic - no beer: Fridge empty!


CntdwnToExtn is offline  
Old 02-27-2005, 11:37 PM   #8 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by 4W4K3
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???
Sonikbaby is offline  
Old 02-27-2005, 11:48 PM   #9 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,013
Send a message via AIM to DJ-CHRIS
Default

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
DJ-CHRIS is offline  
Old 02-27-2005, 11:56 PM   #10 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 24
Default

So the 3000 have the higher clock speeds?

hmm.. weird
__________________

Sonikbaby 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 07:42 AM.


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