03-21-2004, 07:00 AM
|
|
Swami
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,303
|
|
Intel to Use Model Numbers, Not Mhz
'Megahertz myth' is a phrase that various folks (AMD & Apple especially) have been bandying around for a while. About two years ago AMD changed from rating their CPUs by actual Mhz, to an equivalent rating, and then recently moved to model numbers for the Opterons (AMD-64 processors). Well, in May, Intel is also planning to change the marketing for most of their line-up to a chip-numbering system.
"Intel later this year will adopt a new system for differentiating its processors that de-emphasizes the widely used gigahertz, or clock speed. Sources familiar with Intel's plans said that the chipmaker in May will begin affixing each of its new processors with a number designed to help consumers decipher how the features stack up against other processors in the same family. Intel will use numbers in the ranges of 300, 500 and 700, similar to the model numbers BMW uses on its sedans." So, you'll get the high model numbers roaring up close behind you, flashing you with their headlights and beeping on their horns then? Ah � so not exactly like BMWs then. :wink:
"The new system is a dramatic change in Intel's marketing approach because it takes emphasis away from using clock speed as a main measure of performance. Instead, the system will strive to create a scenario in which a person choosing between several 300 series chips, for example, equates the decision to an exercise in choosing a good, better or best processor, sources familiar with the plan said." So then, one best processor to go, hold the Celeron. :lol:
"Intel's Dothan Pentium M chips will be grouped inside the 700 series, the sources said. Its 500 series will include both desktop and mobile Pentium 4 chips, and its 300 series will include desktop and mobile Celeron chips. The company is most likely to label each chip with its family name, such as Pentium M, first. Its processor number, such as 700, will follow. Then Intel will list clock speed, cache size, bus speed and other features that impact performance. A chip with even only one different feature, such as a slower or faster bus speed than others, would likely get a different number in order to set it apart".
With a mobile Pentium M at 1.4Ghz beating a Pentium IV at many tasks at 2Ghz, it's not surprising that people can get confused. AMD really do seem to be making the running at the moment in terms of initiatives. Intel have adopted 64 bit x86 processing and now this model numbering methodology. Does the model system number make sense to you guys, or do you reckon we will be soon be pining for the days when relative CPU performance was 'simple' to understand? :?:
|
| |
|
|
|
03-21-2004, 07:18 AM
|
|
5000+ Posts? I Should OWN This Site!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,133
|
|
Ah, but they say they're still going to list clock speed, just after the model number.
Maybe at some point the model numbers will be comfortable, but I'd think for a while it'll just be one MORE number to remember, adding complexity, not removing it.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-21-2004, 07:20 AM
|
|
5000+ Posts? I Should OWN This Site!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,616
|
|
"That thing got a Hemy?"
__________________
iPhone 4! ☠☠☠ Mid-2010 15" MacBook Pro! ☠☠☠ Gateway LT2102h! ☠☠☠ Dell XPS M1210!
|
| |
|
|
|
03-21-2004, 07:26 AM
|
|
Theorist
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 275
|
|
I don't get it!
|
| |
|
|
|
03-21-2004, 08:49 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,055
|
|
Hmm, I think Intel pulled itself into this dilemma. Their constant struggle to get faster "MHz" only made the fact they can't make the clock speed faster their own problem.
Instead of trying to play around with pipeline designs, etc, to make the processor operate at a higher clock speed, Intel should have worked on building faster processors without focusing on "higher clock speeds."
It's clear clock speed doesn't matter anymore... too bad Intel didn't see the vision until recently... :bangin:
Should Intel adopt a new processor naming system? No... well, not in the way they want to. If every manufacturer adopts a different way of ranking their processors, consumers will be confused. How will they be able to compare performance across brands? They'll end up comparing the clock speeds. The processor giants (Intel, AMD, IBM, Motorola, Sun, etc) need to get together and map out an industry-standard naming convention. Only then will consumers move away from what they're comfortable with, clock speeds.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-21-2004, 09:29 AM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 318
|
|
Hey man I'm a strictly Intel 700 series person. I wouldn
t dare be seen driving a 500 and don't even get me started on the 300!
Will they come in a range of colours and trim options? I want mine to have a leather interior.
Can I get furry dice with that?
|
| |
|
|
|
03-21-2004, 09:41 AM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 71
|
|
...So there will be chips like, Pentium SX34.2R EX+
Thats too confusing
Heck, Confusion is what makes life fun :multi:
|
| |
|
|
|
03-21-2004, 10:31 AM
|
|
Theorist
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 268
|
|
WHHHHHHIIIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
These days the upper end of P4s dissipate over 100 watts, and this will only get worse as they attempt raise the clock even further. Even with the new Prescott's 90nm process things have not gotten better. All this means much larger heatsinks are needed and most importantly faster spinning more powerful fans. So not only is a lot of heat produced, but a dang lot of noise. It's the latter part that bothers me most and probably a lot of others out there as well. Next box I build I'm going to give serious thought to water cooling if the situation doesn't get much better.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-21-2004, 05:25 PM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 484
|
|
I like the idea, although I think it would be better if the PC industry press made benchmark data easier to find.
For example, I was in the market for a new notebook a few weeks ago. Speed was important to me because I am using it for heavy database work. Although I knew that the Pentium M gets more out of each clock cycle than a Pentium 4, I never found a good benchmark rating to compair processor models.
|
| |
|
|
|
03-21-2004, 05:36 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 238
|
|
Stupid Intel, now I have to change how I look at AMD's chips now, since they based their ratings on Intel's clock speeds. For example, I'm looking at either upgrading to an Athlon XP 3000+ or a Athlon 64 3000+, now Intel decides to throw a wrench into everything.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
