• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is NE1 else blind to AMD's actual MHz/GHz ratings of Athlon XP's now after the whole PR rating thing?

NFS4

NFS4

No Lifer
To tell you the truth, since AMD implemented the whole PR scheme, I've fallen right into their groove. I don't even recognize (or remember) the actual GHz ratings of the new chips anymore. When the PR system was first implemented, it was easy for me to translate the PR rating to the actual GHz rating...but now I'm just like "F*&K IT" and I just pay attention to the PR rating.

Anyone else gotten this way?
 
Originally posted by: NFS4
To tell you the truth, since AMD implemented the whole PR scheme, I've fallen right into their groove. I don't even recognize (or remember) the actual GHz ratings of the new chips anymore. When the PR system was first implemented, it was easy for me to translate the PR rating to the actual GHz rating...but now I'm just like "F*&K IT" and I just pay attention to the PR rating.

Anyone else gotten this way?
Click to expand...

I'm guilty. But at this point, I still feel they're fair, so I don't hold anything against them for the time being.
 
Originally posted by: John
No. It takes a whole 2 seconds to do a search on google, or take a quick look at Anand's Chart in case you forget the MHz ratings.

🙂
Click to expand...

That's not the point. What I'm saying is, has it gotten to the point where you can't AUTOMATICALLY retrieve the actual speed ratings from your head anymore. Of course, any flunky can go look up some numbers...but do you automatically correlate the PR rating with the actual speed rating instaneously.
 
i quess AMD made better then cyrix did.....you cant just walk the walk

and....yes.....i know what you mean....i have kinda fallen into the PR groove......😉
 
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Originally posted by: NFS4
To tell you the truth, since AMD implemented the whole PR scheme, I've fallen right into their groove. I don't even recognize (or remember) the actual GHz ratings of the new chips anymore. When the PR system was first implemented, it was easy for me to translate the PR rating to the actual GHz rating...but now I'm just like "F*&K IT" and I just pay attention to the PR rating.

Anyone else gotten this way?
Click to expand...

I'm guilty. But at this point, I still feel they're fair, so I don't hold anything against them for the time being.
Click to expand...

Ohh, I'm not holding anything against them. I'm just saying that their PR scheme has worked on me 😉
 
i admit i refer to my processor as "a sixteen hundred", when in fact, (at least normally its supposed to 😛) it runs at 1.4 ghz... but, its not like back in the good old days of Cyrix M2's, PR300's etc... NE1 remember those 🙂?
 
In all honesty I do catch myself on occasion having to take a few moments to do the PR -> MHz calculation when dealing with customers.
 
Originally posted by: zsouthboy
i admit i refer to my processor as "a sixteen hundred", when in fact, (at least normally its supposed to 😛) it runs at 1.47 ghz... but, its not like back in the good old days of Cyrix M2's, PR300's etc... NE1 remember those 🙂?
Click to expand...

The 1600+ is 1.4GHz. 😉
 
Yeah, I have too, but I also catch myself from thinking it's a 2.8 GHz for a 2800+ when it's really something else. I don't have the formula or anything memorized, I'll usually hit NewEgg or something to find the speed of it.
 
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Originally posted by: NFS4
To tell you the truth, since AMD implemented the whole PR scheme, I've fallen right into their groove. I don't even recognize (or remember) the actual GHz ratings of the new chips anymore. When the PR system was first implemented, it was easy for me to translate the PR rating to the actual GHz rating...but now I'm just like "F*&K IT" and I just pay attention to the PR rating.

Anyone else gotten this way?
Click to expand...

I'm guilty. But at this point, I still feel they're fair, so I don't hold anything against them for the time being.
Click to expand...

Fair to what? Maybe the desktop market, but I feel it is an incredible mistake for the workstation/small server market to use PR ratings. 2200+ MP's to what? Its more than just Xeons. Any IT person from a company that doesnt know Mhz doesnt matter shouldnt be an IT person.
 
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Originally posted by: NFS4
To tell you the truth, since AMD implemented the whole PR scheme, I've fallen right into their groove. I don't even recognize (or remember) the actual GHz ratings of the new chips anymore. When the PR system was first implemented, it was easy for me to translate the PR rating to the actual GHz rating...but now I'm just like "F*&K IT" and I just pay attention to the PR rating.

Anyone else gotten this way?
Click to expand...

I'm guilty. But at this point, I still feel they're fair, so I don't hold anything against them for the time being.
Click to expand...

Ohh, I'm not holding anything against them. I'm just saying that their PR scheme has worked on me 😉
Click to expand...



you feeble minded fool@ you are weak!





i have has well out of laziness. 😛

well at least between 1900+ - 2200+
i still know what 2400 and 2600+ are, but when 166 fsb comes into play, hell if i know 😛
 
Any IT person from a company that doesnt know Mhz doesnt matter shouldnt be an IT person.
Click to expand...

ya right, like have the people in "IT" really have time to worry about mhz. gimme a fvcking break.

that's why generalizations are sooo stupid. "IT" is such a huge field how can you possibly imagine that the above statement is true?
 
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Originally posted by: NFS4
To tell you the truth, since AMD implemented the whole PR scheme, I've fallen right into their groove. I don't even recognize (or remember) the actual GHz ratings of the new chips anymore. When the PR system was first implemented, it was easy for me to translate the PR rating to the actual GHz rating...but now I'm just like "F*&K IT" and I just pay attention to the PR rating.

Anyone else gotten this way?
Click to expand...

I'm guilty. But at this point, I still feel they're fair, so I don't hold anything against them for the time being.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

I mean, I'm aware of some of the actual MHz/GHz ratings because I have become very familiar with the chips, but I do feel, at least now, that the PR ratings are pretty accurate.

If you saw the P4 3.06GHz review, the 2800+ kept it very interesting.
 
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Originally posted by: NFS4
To tell you the truth, since AMD implemented the whole PR scheme, I've fallen right into their groove. I don't even recognize (or remember) the actual GHz ratings of the new chips anymore. When the PR system was first implemented, it was easy for me to translate the PR rating to the actual GHz rating...but now I'm just like "F*&K IT" and I just pay attention to the PR rating.

Anyone else gotten this way?
Click to expand...

I'm guilty. But at this point, I still feel they're fair, so I don't hold anything against them for the time being.
Click to expand...

Ohh, I'm not holding anything against them. I'm just saying that their PR scheme has worked on me 😉
Click to expand...

If it's worked on you then it's a safe bet that it's worked well enough on the average consumer.... indeed most probably don't even realize the PR isnt the actual clockspeed.

Personally, I still know the PR-MHz correlation between all of the AthlonXP line.... but I suspect that's primarily because the AthlonXP is frequently references and discussed.
I suspect that two years or so from now when the AthlonXP is older and seldom mentioned and certainly not recommended I'll have a difficult time remembering what the actual clockspeed is.
 
Originally posted by: Rand
Originally posted by: NFS4
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Originally posted by: NFS4
To tell you the truth, since AMD implemented the whole PR scheme, I've fallen right into their groove. I don't even recognize (or remember) the actual GHz ratings of the new chips anymore. When the PR system was first implemented, it was easy for me to translate the PR rating to the actual GHz rating...but now I'm just like "F*&K IT" and I just pay attention to the PR rating.

Anyone else gotten this way?
Click to expand...

I'm guilty. But at this point, I still feel they're fair, so I don't hold anything against them for the time being.
Click to expand...

Ohh, I'm not holding anything against them. I'm just saying that their PR scheme has worked on me 😉
Click to expand...

If it's worked on you then it's a safe bet that it's worked well enough on the average consumer.... indeed most probably don't even realize the PR isnt the actual clockspeed.

Personally, I still know the PR-MHz correlation between all of the AthlonXP line.... but I suspect that's primarily because the AthlonXP is frequently references and discussed.
I suspect that two years or so from now when the AthlonXP is older and seldom mentioned and certainly not recommended I'll have a difficult time remembering what the actual clockspeed is.
Click to expand...
I agree.

I know what NFS4 is saying; I?ve fallen into the AMD trap also.

But Rand put everything into perspective, the "average consumer"! It was indeed AMD's goal to fool the average person.

[EDIT] Forgot quotes.
 
I've partially "fallen for it", in that I don't automatically convert PR-rating to actual MHz anymore, though I do keep the fact that there's a difference in the back of my mind. Also, when people tell me that they have an "Athlon 1800" I tend to ask them if its a 1.8GHz or a 1800+. Or, sometimes even if somebody tells me that they have an "Athlon 1.8GHz" I might still ask them if I suspect that they might have bought a 1800+ and mistakenly assumed it was a 1.8GHz.
 
Personally... in the bigger scheme of things... i don't think it's working... it's only obvious to people like you and me who frequent boards like this... but everywhere i go... even the salespeople don't buy it... instead they recommend P4s or whatever. "The Athlon is rated at this and that... but it's really running at so-so GHz..."... i hear that a lot when i go to best buy or wherever else... quite sad.
 
Originally posted by: BoYRaCeR
Personally... in the bigger scheme of things... i don't think it's working... it's only obvious to people like you and me who frequent boards like this... but everywhere i go... even the salespeople don't buy it... instead they recommend P4s or whatever. "The Athlon is rated at this and that... but it's really running at so-so GHz..."... i hear that a lot when i go to best buy or wherever else... quite sad.
Click to expand...

I suspect your correct to some extent, quite a few OEM's market their AMD based systems as "AMD AthlonXP 1800 (1.53GHz)"... so consumers are able to see the actual clockspeed. Whether or not they take that into account, or even recognize what it says is debateable however.
Without that however I'm certain the vast majority would immediately assume that PR=MHz.

Doubtlessly AMD isnt altogether pleased with present trend, and I can't say as I blame them given that in most cases the PR rating is relatively reliable.
Naturally it can vary drastically depending on the individual platform the AthlonXP is running on compared to the platform the P4 is running on.
It can vary from highly over-rated to highly under-rated. At least on the whole it's reasonably respectable however.


 
I know that the CPU I'm using which happens to be called an "Athlon XP 1900+" runs about as fast or slightly faster than one called a "Pentium 4 1.8A" 😉

I have to sit down and think for a couple of secs to remember the clock speed but then, why does it actually matter what it's clocked at as long as it zooms merrily along from day to day.
 
I always think "XP 1600+ = 1.4ghz" and then just add an extra 66/67mhz onto that for each PR100.....then AMD changed it!....and my excellent system is foiled! 😀
 
I have always considered AMD's PR rating to be the part's model number. I do comparisons between Intel and AMD based on performance and price.
 
No, I just subtract 400MHz and don't care if I'm wrong or not. I refuse to be taken for a fool; 2600+ my ass.
 
Yes and no.

I've always viewed clockspeed numbers as somewhat arbitrary so they could change the numbers to 6000+ and I wouldn't care. Before I get lambasted, let me explain: We can't actually see the physical process of faster CPUs, we only see the effect on system speed. Reviews with benchmarks show those speeds in various tests. When you also consider the disparity between the performance of Intel and AMD chips and the chip's speeds and PR numbers it really becomes apparent that looking at the MHz doesn't really help either. The only thing the numbers, MHz or PR, help for is that a higher number on a same chip will run faster than a lower number on that chip.

Do I think of a 1800+ AthlonXP as a 1800 speed part? Sure. But that only means it's faster than the 1700+ part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top