Author: Bo Persson
Date: 00:46:58 08/26/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 25, 2003 at 19:56:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 25, 2003 at 06:13:58, Bo Persson wrote: > >>On August 25, 2003 at 03:36:03, Russell Reagan wrote: >> >>>On August 25, 2003 at 01:43:23, Sally Weltrop wrote: >>> >>>>On August 24, 2003 at 16:17:07, Sietel Monic wrote: >>>> >>>>>>yeap, been with them for years now. If it was just intel alone we would be >>>>>>paying $1,500 for a 3GHz chip. My next machine is going to be a Athlon Dual >>>>>>3.2GHz >>>>> >>>>>Amd is coming out with dual athlon Mp doing 3.2 ghz(each?)? Or is this both >>>>>combined processor speeds? >>>> >>>> >>>>http://speedycpu.dyndns.org/mp3200.htm >>> >>>That is 2.4GHz, not 3.2GHz. Yes, the 3200 is misleading, probably on purpose :) >> >>The 3.2 vs 2.4 is also misleading. Definitely on purpose. >> >>Look - my engine is 200 HP at 3200 rpm, his is just 2400 rpm... >> >>200 HP V8 >>200 HP V6 >>200 HP V4 Turbo >> >>Which car runs the fastest? :-) > >I'll bet the V8 wins the drag race.. (hint: torque) > >:) > Sure, as long as the track is straight ahead. That is an unfair comparison. :-) The V4 turbo is lighter, and can be put in a much smaller car. Just wait till the first turn... I think this is really the problem with benchmarks. How many turns are there on a normal track? Do they generally turn left or right? As we have seen before, Intel advertises RPMs and not HPs or torque. So AMD has invented an "RPM Rating" of 3200+, and forgets to tell that they might actually have 210 HPs. Sigh, again! Bo Persson
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.