Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: The AMD rating sytem - hmmmm

  1. #1
    Goron goron Kumagoro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,000
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked
    138 times in 112 posts

    The AMD rating sytem - hmmmm

    I read that the new sempron ratings will be inline with the celeron D
    i.e. a sempron 2600 is equivalent to a celeron d 2600 MHz

    But a 2500 Barton XP will still perform better...

    I thought (from reading other threads) that AMD claimed their rating system was based on the original athlon and not directly to intel chips.

    Reading all the system test etc i have never trusted AMDs rating for the XPs anyway. They always seemed about 200 points over rated from tests.

    I dont think much of the new intel one either its just meaning less to me.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Kezzer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,863
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked
    5 times in 5 posts
    Remember that 2500 is not the CPU speed, it's just the name of the CPU. i.e. a 3200+ operates at 2.2GHz.

    Just to make sure

  3. #3
    HEXUS.timelord. Zak33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I'm a Jessie
    Posts
    34,419
    Thanks
    2,710
    Thanked
    2,816 times in 1,732 posts
    • Zak33's system
      • Storage:
      • Kingston HyperX SSD, Hitachi 1Tb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Nvidia 1060
      • PSU:
      • Coolermaster 800w
      • Case:
      • Silverstone Fortress FT01
      • Operating System:
      • Win10
      • Internet:
      • Zen FTC uber speedy
    oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh

    tricky subject

    The original XP chips were definately compared to the original Thunderbird chips, but who knows HOW they are now done? Mystery.

    It's all relative. Like my Mum...she's a relative (weird woman) and you can only compare my Mum to me or my Dad...not to someone elses Mum, who does thing differently.

    Does that make sense?

    No?

    Nor do AMD's ratings However....a Sempron WILL at least COMPETE with a Celery, so we gotta go with it.

    For me there is only ONE way to compare.

    Price....simple as that. Is it WORTH the dough in the users opinion. No other way to compare really.

    Quote Originally Posted by Advice Trinity by Knoxville
    "The second you aren't paying attention to the tool you're using, it will take your fingers from you. It does not know sympathy." |
    "If you don't gaffer it, it will gaffer you" | "Belt and braces"

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Inverness (UK)
    Posts
    293
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    • Captain Fizz's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Maximus Hero VIII
      • CPU:
      • i7 6700K
      • Memory:
      • 16GB Corsair
      • Storage:
      • SM951 + Many more
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 980Ti
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 750W
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake Supressor F51
      • Operating System:
      • Win10
      • Monitor(s):
      • XB270HU Predator
    AMD originally advised that it was what speed a Thunderbird core would need to run at to give the same performance.

    So the XP1600 would be the equivalent of a Thunderbird core running at 1600MHz. (They topped out at 1400MHz)
    XP3200 - Thunderbird core at 3200MHz.

    But everyone knows it was just to attract the "first time buyer"/PC Builder who was looking for a PC and Intel had a faster clock speed, therefore a higher number to the end user, so they would go for the bigger number. AMD needed to do something to show that their CPU's do indeed crunch more per MHz than Intels do.

    What would interest me is what a Barton core running at 2400~2500MHz would be equal to. Tom's Hardware had the formula that AMD used but that was a few years ago that it was up. Might be in the archives.

  5. #5
    Leo
    Leo is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    250
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Zak33
    oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh

    tricky subject

    The original XP chips were definately compared to the original Thunderbird chips, but who knows HOW they are now done? Mystery.

    It's all relative. Like my Mum...she's a relative (weird woman) and you can only compare my Mum to me or my Dad...not to someone elses Mum, who does thing differently.

    Does that make sense?

    No?

    Nor do AMD's ratings However....a Sempron WILL at least COMPETE with a Celery, so we gotta go with it.

    For me there is only ONE way to compare.

    Price....simple as that. Is it WORTH the dough in the users opinion. No other way to compare really.
    Well said, though Intel havent made it any easier as well. All this naming based on BMW 3/5/7 series is enough to do anyone's head in.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. AMD XP2800+ Overheating Problems
    By IceWebb in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 04-12-2006, 05:57 PM
  2. AMD Setup, Looks Good To Me But I Dont Use AMD!
    By Clstrphbc_donut in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 16-03-2004, 01:38 AM
  3. AMD Retail Fans
    By TooTay in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 18-12-2003, 08:50 PM
  4. Do you get an 'XP rating' applied when you o/c?
    By Austin in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 11-12-2003, 03:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •