comparing AMD to P clock speeds - 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 07-26-2005, 02:58 PM   #1 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
sheky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 94
Send a message via AIM to sheky
Default comparing AMD to P clock speeds

Kind of a noob question, but I'm planning to buy my first Athlon processor. I know that mhz arent all that matter, but I wondering what a Athlon 64 3200 939 pin would translate to in Pentium speeds. And a 64 3000? (Just to get an idea of how the translation works)
__________________

sheky is offline  
Old 07-26-2005, 03:00 PM   #2 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,010
Default

well a 3.2ghz pentium 4 is an average for the 3200.


According to toms hardware, a 3200 is comparable to a 3.6ghz P4 in games.

http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20...html#directx_9

Search aropund there for the other tests for all those processors.
__________________

__________________

Cisco CCNA, Comptia A+, 1/3 through CCNP
Trifid is offline  
Old 07-26-2005, 03:37 PM   #3 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,013
Send a message via AIM to DJ-CHRIS
Default

Basicly their rating equals a pentium processor for most tasks

For video, Intel is much better than AMD
For gaming, AMD is much better than Intel
DJ-CHRIS is offline  
Old 07-26-2005, 04:15 PM   #4 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,932
Default

Without starting another idiotic AMD-vs-Intel thread...

The original marketing attempt from AMD was to put a number at the end of the series model that buyers could associate to the pompus Intel speeds being splattered everywhere at the time.

For instance, a 3.0Ghz Intel was comparable to a AMD 3000.

That only worked well up till the end of the AMD Athlon XP series. Now with the new 64bit AMDs and the even newer dual-core 64bit AMDs, the comparisons really diverge. It's not as simple anymore to just say that the speed of one is comparable to the speed of the other. They are functionally too different now.

Your best bet for determining what is good for you, is to read some benchmarks comparing the AMD and Intel chips you're looking at, for tasks you intend to perform. Everything else is purely unfounded conjecture.
__________________

-----------------------------------------------
Don\'t hate the player...Hate the game...
ShoobieRat is offline  
Old 07-26-2005, 04:30 PM   #5 (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

When AMD says "3700+" or "3200+" they are saying basically that this chip will operate as good if not better than a 3.7ghz or a 3.2 ghz cpu. They are very subtly saying that "This processor will run like a Pentium 3.7". They are very pretentious in their naming scheme. Pentiums always have a higher clock speed, and when overclocking, you can get a much higher clock speed on a pentium, although not necessarily more power.
Him is offline  
Old 07-26-2005, 08:35 PM   #6 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 84
Default

the only difference youll see between the two is the p4 will be better at multitasking and the amd will be better at single tasks (a.k.a. gaming).
__________________
MCSE Certified (passed on second try lol). But am only 15.
TechKid is offline  
Old 07-26-2005, 09:10 PM   #7 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 529
Send a message via AIM to alecjahn
Default

I think AMD's term for their speeds were approximately equal to "the competition's" processors, and never really points towards Intel. I agree, that they don't line up anymore and have merged off quite a bit from the 'older' Ath. XP series.
__________________
You're the guy from that hamburger train, right?
alecjahn is offline  
Old 07-26-2005, 09:26 PM   #8 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,013
Send a message via AIM to DJ-CHRIS
Default

They sure as hell do not point to other processors besides Intel

AMD ratings do nto compare to VIA processors, it would take a 9ghz VIA to top AMD off right now.
DJ-CHRIS is offline  
Old 07-26-2005, 09:55 PM   #9 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 529
Send a message via AIM to alecjahn
Default

I'm not saying it isn't obvious that their only "competition" is Intel, but that they don't want to say they're directly competing and having to mark with Intel, making them seem like the lesser company, that just happens to be keeping up.
__________________
You're the guy from that hamburger train, right?
alecjahn is offline  
Old 07-27-2005, 09:35 AM   #10 (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

Like I said, they are very subtly poking at Intel. That is the onyl reason they would have such a namiing scheme. On any review websites, when they talk about an AMD 3700+ they would compare it to an Intel 3.7ghz, it is them saying alomost outright that they are better than Intel.
__________________

Him 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 11:15 PM.


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