Petition to stop AMD from using the PR system...
- Thread starter Afrocream
- Start date
<< uhhhhhhhhhh wtf? amd rates their chips by the speed is someone thinking about cyrix here? >>
Cyrix/Via markets their newer chips by speed also. He is referring to AMD's plan to switch to a PR based rating system with the desktop Palomino.
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q3/010829/news-02.html
"The same is valid for motherboards and their POST. A new BIOS Writer's Guide prohibits the BIOS from ever displaying the true core frequency of Palomino! It has to display the MODEL number instead. "
I dunno..I guess I would prefer to have my bios recognize the true MHZ of my processor. Obviously AMD is up the creek if they are taking the easy way out and implementing this trash. Why not just release faster processors? Are they that much behind? Is that way the Palomino has been delayed? Why not just lengthen the pipleline like Intel did? The processor performance wouldn't scale as impressive as it has, but with the other strong points like FPU, it *should* still outperform an equally clocked P4. Ahh..they days of Cyrix are back
"The same is valid for motherboards and their POST. A new BIOS Writer's Guide prohibits the BIOS from ever displaying the true core frequency of Palomino! It has to display the MODEL number instead. "
I dunno..I guess I would prefer to have my bios recognize the true MHZ of my processor. Obviously AMD is up the creek if they are taking the easy way out and implementing this trash. Why not just release faster processors? Are they that much behind? Is that way the Palomino has been delayed? Why not just lengthen the pipleline like Intel did? The processor performance wouldn't scale as impressive as it has, but with the other strong points like FPU, it *should* still outperform an equally clocked P4. Ahh..they days of Cyrix are back
amd is just trying to get rid of the mhz/performance myth. this is just another step in educating the public. if you eliminate the mhz, theres no myth. (also, for the dumb consumers that buy stuff, doesnt a amd 2100 look faster than a p4 2.1ghz? big numbers.... 
)
)I'd have to agree this isn't about the ppl in the industry. Who's give a rat's ass what it 's on the computer screen at bootup? If your your Quake 3 screams does it matter? This is for the folk who want to get the best performance for the price. So, you tell me...does a P4 2 Gig, beat a 1.4 Athlon? For the most part no. So this is AMD's way of educating the public, because unfortunately, MHz sells.
-sp
-sp
<< No matter what, I would still prefer to have my processor's MHz rather than the PR. >>
Why? You won't be able to figure out how to multiply your system bus by your processor multiplier?
Afro, I would disagree that AMD is behind. Rather they're right on pace. The problem being consumers look at mhz for comparison, and, 2000 is faster than 1200 if that's -all- you know about two different chips.
To think of it another way, consider how engines in cars are rated. No manufacturer markets their motor as running at 5000rpm. Nor should they, it's not a relevent basis for comparison. However, some do market in the spirit of the mhz myth by selling V-8 engines where a V-6 could deliver the same performance - but that's harder to convince the car buyer of.
My reservation is with the PR system. It concedes intel as the default, the standard to measure against. Merely this along suggests to the same consumers, those who are not geeks I mean, that this is somehow a lesser product. Does Chevrolet market their pickups as being "equivelant to a Ford model X" Of course not. Why would they give Ford free advertising? (Note, yes they will say it's better than a Ford, which is a measure of comparison, but done in such a light as to imply the competitor's product is inferior)
So getting back to the engine example, generic standards of horsepower and torque have been settled upon. I would suggest the same needs to be developed for CPU manufacturers. Up until now mhz has been our hp number, and that worked extremely well in the 486 days. Then Cyrix went the other route in the Pentium days. Since then it's been a confusing shopping environment for the non technical crowd.
I'm not entirely sure how to set such a standard, a number derived from a series of comprehensive benchmarks would seem to be in order, though as we're all quite aware of, if the benchmark is static then the next line of CPUs can be designed with them in mind. Don't think they wouldn't, both intel and amd are in the market of selling chips beyond all else.
So yes, a PR system bothers me greatly. But with lack of a different standard in place I'm afraid it may be necessary for the time being. Marketing in such a way as to promote your competitor to any degree is still better than not selling product.
To think of it another way, consider how engines in cars are rated. No manufacturer markets their motor as running at 5000rpm. Nor should they, it's not a relevent basis for comparison. However, some do market in the spirit of the mhz myth by selling V-8 engines where a V-6 could deliver the same performance - but that's harder to convince the car buyer of.
My reservation is with the PR system. It concedes intel as the default, the standard to measure against. Merely this along suggests to the same consumers, those who are not geeks I mean, that this is somehow a lesser product. Does Chevrolet market their pickups as being "equivelant to a Ford model X" Of course not. Why would they give Ford free advertising? (Note, yes they will say it's better than a Ford, which is a measure of comparison, but done in such a light as to imply the competitor's product is inferior)
So getting back to the engine example, generic standards of horsepower and torque have been settled upon. I would suggest the same needs to be developed for CPU manufacturers. Up until now mhz has been our hp number, and that worked extremely well in the 486 days. Then Cyrix went the other route in the Pentium days. Since then it's been a confusing shopping environment for the non technical crowd.
I'm not entirely sure how to set such a standard, a number derived from a series of comprehensive benchmarks would seem to be in order, though as we're all quite aware of, if the benchmark is static then the next line of CPUs can be designed with them in mind. Don't think they wouldn't, both intel and amd are in the market of selling chips beyond all else.
So yes, a PR system bothers me greatly. But with lack of a different standard in place I'm afraid it may be necessary for the time being. Marketing in such a way as to promote your competitor to any degree is still better than not selling product.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter