Intel willl not sells MHz anymore! (UPDATED)

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

TheRod

Distinguished
Aug 2, 2002
2,031
0
19,780
Read this :
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1994" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1994</A>

Finally, Intel get caught at is own game, they will finally starts to sell performance instead of MHz only.

If they Intel do this, AMD will probably stop using PR too. We will soon start to see more model numbers like Opteron's model number and Athlon FX line.

<b><font color=red>UPDATE - March 19th, 2004</font color=red></b>
New Intel model designation : <A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20040319050055.html" target="_new">From X-bit Labs.</A>

Ta dam! We have it, the new Intel model designation list. From low-end to high-end not a bad scheme. I think it will be better thanthe current AMD scheme.
3XX = low-end
5XX = mid-range
7XX = high-end

Clear and simple!

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by TheRod on 03/19/04 10:10 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
X

Xeon

Distinguished
Feb 21, 2004
1,304
0
19,280
A bit overstated, the model #'s aren't PR #'s. Intel has too many processors running around, takeing a few lines and adding model #'s will simplify purchases. It's not like this is new they have a similar system for the Pentium-M's based on power consumtion.

Xeon

<font color=orange>Scratch Here To Reveal Prize</font color=orange>
 
Crashman

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
Dec 31, 2007
48,594
92
66,190
The biggest problem is that model numbers are arbitrary, the industry needs a standard measure of performance, like gigaflops or something...anything!

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
 
Spitfire_x86

Spitfire_x86

Splendid
Jun 26, 2002
7,248
0
25,780
I like GPU model numbering. Wise people gets good deal, and stupid people get stupid things. But no company has extra advantage because the clock speed is higher

------------
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A>

<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>
 
T

TheRod

Distinguished
Aug 2, 2002
2,031
0
19,780
Probably, but today's CPU have so much difference in architecture that we can't rate them by looking to aspect of them.

If the industry would do so, there would be company that would optimize architecture for top performance in one aspect.

What we need is more and more CPU reviews, because reviews with lots of different benchmarks are the best way to know how to rate a CPU.

Car have the same problem... It's not all 150 HP cars that are equal, there is so much that influence performance, and not all buyer's want the same thing.

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
 
phial

phial

Splendid
Oct 29, 2002
6,757
0
25,780
The biggest problem is that model numbers are arbitrary, the industry needs a standard measure of performance, like gigaflops or something...anything!
Click to expand...


i couldnt agree more

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>
 
T

trooper11

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2004
758
0
18,980
yeah that would be great, but i doubt intel or amd would agree to one standard. plus, since both aim for different areas of performance and use differnt architectures, it would be tough to create a fair scale. we can see that today in how intel chips excel in some areas, amd in others. for the moment , one scale would be tough. but i am confused at intel even considering this. as if it wasnt confusing enough already, and oyu know the mainstream public will be confused. for years they have been pumped with the more is better for mhz rating alone. if intel pushes this large scale, it will be very interesting to watch. for instance, if they were to change the naming scheme to a rating or whatever you want to call it, it does tend to pave the way for amd to make some inroads, no matter what intel's intention for the numbers are.
 
phial

phial

Splendid
Oct 29, 2002
6,757
0
25,780
yep. if the general population actually knew that a 1.6 Duron is generally faster than a 3ghz Celeron, and substantially faster in games.... the attitude towards Intel would be quite different today (thankfully that seems to be slowly happening already)

-------
<A HREF="http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/you.html" target="_new">please dont click here! </A>
 
eden

eden

Champion
Oct 3, 2001
26,549
0
50,780
The problem is simply that even MHZ was used as a way to measure even though it no longer works as an indicator what with AMD using IPC and Intel adopting MHZ more.

MHZ probably was used at first because they found it well represented "the most common denominator" in each CPU part.

I don't believe we can ever achieve an industry standard. No CPU ever will behave equally according to its rating compared to other competing ones, and we see that clearly with the P4 vs Athlon in certain "optimised programs".

--
<i>Ede</i>
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>More updates and added sites as over <font color=red>62</font color=red> no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol: <P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 03/14/04 01:44 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
eden

eden

Champion
Oct 3, 2001
26,549
0
50,780
I think Intel wants confusion. Clarity would kill the celeron.
Click to expand...
As ironic as it is, it could easily be a "Public Truth Statement" LOL.

--
<i>Ede</i>
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>More updates and added sites as over <font color=red>62</font color=red> no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A> :lol:
 
pauldh

pauldh

Illustrious
Jan 1, 2004
11,814
0
40,810
yeah MHz is all the current celerons have to offer. That is why cheasy stores put Intel 2.4GHz in their ads. The Celeron name unfortunately now means look away.

ABIT IS7, P4 2.6C, 512MB Corsair TwinX PC3200LL, Radeon 9800 Pro, Santa Cruz, TruePower 430watt
 
Y

ytoledano

Distinguished
Jan 16, 2003
974
0
18,980
So no more "Intel 2.8GHZ!!!" when the POS has a Celeron in it (and and a Geforce4MX)? Damn!

<b>Buying Dell for tech-support is like buying Playboy for the articles.</b>
 
B

bandikoot

Distinguished
Apr 23, 2003
423
0
18,780
I saw that and it looks good on the desktop side I suppose. It looks like the notebook side is designed to push pentium M's since they are all 7XXs while it looks like the mobile pIVs will be 5XXs.
 
T

TheRod

Distinguished
Aug 2, 2002
2,031
0
19,780
It looks like the notebook side is designed to push pentium M's since they are all 7XXs while it looks like the mobile pIVs will be 5XXs.
Click to expand...
Intel needed to do so, because they could not get people to buy lower speed Pentium M. Because so many people still thinks that the old "Intel MHz model" is what rules CPU performance.

I really think this will help kills the MHz myth. Because average customer will starts to ask why there is different Pentium X GHz?

We will probably starts to see ads. with something like :
Intel 3XX 3.0GHz for 499$
Intel 5XX 3.0GHz for 999$

Instead of the old "Celeron disguise" ads. like "Intel 2.6GHz for 399$".

I really wish to see the end of the MHz myth!

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
 
T

TheRod

Distinguished
Aug 2, 2002
2,031
0
19,780
In response to: "Where AMD goes, Intel follows :eek:)
Toms Hardware Site is a joke !"
Ahhh, ignorance is bliss, moron.
Click to expand...

Humm... I never wrote this, I think you replied to the wrong guy! :smile:

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom