Thanks for your votes. It is what I expected for a result.
I asked this since I was in a debate about AMD's PR ratings. As we know, they are based on Tbird speeds. There are two reasonable possibilities when using that base:
A) PR rating = 1.5 * XPspeed - 500 (A linear formula)
B) PR rating = .148 * XPspeed^1.282 (A power formula)
Check of those rating formulas:
XP speed / Actual PR rating / PR rating (A) / PR rating(B)
1333 / 1500+ / 1500+ / 1501+
1400 / 1600+ / 1600+ / 1598+
1466 / 1700+ / 1700+ / 1696+
1533 / 1800+ / 1800+ / 1795+
1600 / 1900+ / 1900+ / 1896+
1666 / 2000+ / 2000+ / 1998+
1733 / 2100+ / 2100+ / 2101+
Obviously if you round the formula (B), then you have the same numbers within this range. However with extrapolations, things get completely different.
If you extrapolate backwards to 1 GHz formula (A) says that a 1GHz XP is the same exact speed as a 1 GHz Tbird. Obviously most people disagree with this (The XP has some architectural improvements over the Tbird). So I argue that formula (A) is wrong. Formula (B) predicts a PR rating of 1038+ for an underclocked 1 GHz Athlon XP - slightly faster than the Tbird. So I argue that formula (B) is better.
Extrapolating forward is the interesting part though. At higher speeds formula (B) gives a much higher PR rating for the same Athlon XP chip. Basically formula (B) will overexaggerate the performance.
Your thoughts? (Please keep it focused to the PR rating based on Tbird - no off topics)