Question regarding "GHz" when it comes to AMD versus Intel... - 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 10-19-2005, 12:39 AM   #1 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: /home/jason
Posts: 3,056
Send a message via AIM to Jayce
Default Question regarding "GHz" when it comes to AMD versus Intel...

Something sparked when my buddy asked, "Only 1.8?" When I told him I just built a 1.8 GHz Athlon. I didn't know what to say, because I was like, yeah, why not? Then I realized he must of been thinking about Intel, in which some of their newer processors are like 3.6 GHz.

Is Athlon more efficient? Or does it have some kind of dual channel system, where 1.0 GHz Athlon would = 2.0 GHz Intel?

Also, just throwing this thought out there... Would it be possible to build a MAC? Don't know why I'm asking this, I've just never heard of it and was curious.
__________________

Jayce is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 12:42 AM   #2 (permalink)
Grandfather of Techist

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

Yes, the Athlons are more effecient than Intels.

The numbers used by AMD reflect what their processor is equal to, plus.

Thus, a 3200 is equal to, or better than, a 3.2GHz Intel.

Does that help?
__________________

__________________


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 online now  
Old 10-19-2005, 07:50 AM   #3 (permalink)
Field Engineer
 
SHAWN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 4,697
Send a message via AIM to SHAWN
Default

ghz dont mean anything anymore
__________________
A+, Network + , HP Certified Tech and MCP

Specs: AMD Phenom II X6 1095T, Asus M477TD, 8GB GSkill Ripjaws DDR3 1600 7-8-7-24 1T, 128GB Crucial M4 SSD, ATi HD4650, W7, 27" HL272 Monitor
SHAWN is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 08:30 AM   #4 (permalink)
Member (again)
 
macdude425's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Raul's Wild Kingdom...How 'bout that, huh?
Posts: 4,202
Send a message via AIM to macdude425 Send a message via Yahoo to macdude425
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by SHAWN
ghz dont mean anything anymore
Exactly. The megahertz wars are over.
__________________



Debian Support Forums!
macdude425 is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 09:06 AM   #5 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: /home/jason
Posts: 3,056
Send a message via AIM to Jayce
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by macdude425
Exactly. The megahertz wars are over.
I understand. I was just trying to figure something out, like... if I wanted to build a system, but had no idea whether I wanted to use AMD or Intel, I wasn't sure how you'd suitably find a VERY comparable processor speed wise to compare between the two companies.
Jayce is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 09:12 AM   #6 (permalink)
Field Engineer
 
SHAWN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 4,697
Send a message via AIM to SHAWN
Default

AMD 3800 = P4 3.8 ghz
AMD 3000 = P4 3.0 ghz
AMD 1700 = P4 1.7 ghz

Get it?
__________________
A+, Network + , HP Certified Tech and MCP

Specs: AMD Phenom II X6 1095T, Asus M477TD, 8GB GSkill Ripjaws DDR3 1600 7-8-7-24 1T, 128GB Crucial M4 SSD, ATi HD4650, W7, 27" HL272 Monitor
SHAWN is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 12:30 PM   #7 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 70
Send a message via AIM to ZeroStrife49
Default

Right. what AMD lacks in processor frequency, it makes up in Bus speed.
__________________
K . D . M
ZeroStrife49 is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 01:30 PM   #8 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,306
Default

not really it amd does more per clock cycle than an intel plus the bus speed.
__________________
Lonewolf5460 is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 07:09 PM   #9 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

AMD architecture has traditionally used shorter pipelines whereas Intel has continued to stretch them out...to put it into perspective an average AMD64 has I think 12 pipeline stages whereas a prescott has about 30 stages

This basically means that AMD can take less clock cycles to send the information down the pipeline...however since both architectures involve different ways of retrieving and using data they both excel better in specific tasks
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 10-20-2005, 12:34 AM   #10 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Nitestick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: смерти для спаме
Posts: 8,473
Default

^^^ can't be said any better than that. just an extra example a 3700+ san diego is 2.2ghz yet equivelant to a 3.7ghz p4
__________________

Nitestick 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 07:44 AM.


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