[ViolentGreen]

Heres a good read...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=st...h_amd_stocks_dc

[techie32]

Anyone know if the P5 is gonna be 64bit? I've heared something about advanced Hyperthreading, as well as a new socket, but not much else.

[sapiens74]

No threat just a pain in the ass.


AMD is pushing INtel to develop faster, which is good for all of us

[Tomay]

I doubt that P5 will be 64bit, cos intel 865 and 875 are said to support it.

[sapiens74]

Speaking of P5 I saw something interesting on betaplace yetesterday.

I was trying to sign up for Longhorn, and when it asked my CPU, it listed P3,P4 and P5

I guess the name is set already.

[ViolentGreen]

Quote:

Speaking of P5 I saw something interesting on betaplace yetesterday.

I was trying to sign up for Longhorn, and when it asked my CPU, it listed P3,P4 and P5

I guess the name is set already.

Hell yeah... Pentium has the name recognition. They will never give that up. They would be stupid to change it. If they changed the name to...say... asshat. They would end up with all these people coming into stores and not buying the asshat because they have always heard that the pentium is better.

[sapiens74]

They could call it the Penitum 242, or 246 lol

Then again AMD never was good at marketing

[clutch]

Quote:

They could call it the Penitum 242, or 246 lol

Then again AMD never was good at marketing

Nahh... More like P4.NET, P4XP, or P4+.

[sapiens74]

Or better yet P4.2.4.22.1.34

[Brian Frank]

ROFLMAO

[ViolentGreen]

Quote:

They could call it the Penitum 242, or 246 lol

Then again AMD never was good at marketing

That's something that I never understood... THeir whole naming convention was based on the pentium. I guess they were going for value for the money but how could they ever hope to obtain the top spot if they rely on the pentiums for their names?

[AndyFair]

Quote:

Quote:

They could call it the Penitum 242, or 246 lol

Then again AMD never was good at marketing

That's something that I never understood... THeir whole naming convention was based on the pentium. I guess they were going for value for the money but how could they ever hope to obtain the top spot if they rely on the pentiums for their names?

I thought that AMD's numbering was based on performance relative to the original Athlons?

Anyway, I'd buy an asshat processor just for the name...and the label that says "asshat inside"...

AndyF

[sapiens74]

Brand loyality is just about dead. THe Pentium name is more recognizable to those who aren't tech heads.

I think CPU's should be open source.

You get the chip for free and only pay for technical support.


That way we here at ntcompatible get free rides, while the little old lady who can't install the chip gets to pay for all of ours by calling Tech Support.

[Brian Frank]

"I thought that AMD's numbering was based on performance relative to the original Athlons?"

That's correct, specifically the Thunderbird socket A variety.

[ViolentGreen]

Quote:

"I thought that AMD's numbering was based on performance relative to the original Athlons?"

That's correct, specifically the Thunderbird socket A variety.

Everything I have ever read seemed to indicate that a 2500 performs the same as a 2500 MHz pentium.

[sapiens74]

Till they hit 2800 or so


THe New C series with 800FSB are faster in most every way, so the 2800, 3000, and 3200 are not scaled to reflect.

[ViolentGreen]

Quote:

Till they hit 2800 or so


THe New C series with 800FSB are faster in most every way, so the 2800, 3000, and 3200 are not scaled to reflect.

Yeah, I realize that. But wasn't that the original purpose of the numbering system?

[Mr.Guvernment]

^^^
that was the iudea

se

and AMD 1700+ is only a 1.2ghz? but it is supposed to perform like a 1.7ghz Intel P4.

[shassouneh]

no .net, no P4.

I vote for TuxAthlon

AMD chips all the way

[Jerry Atrik]

sure amd will be a threat to intel as they always have been

a threat to 100% cpu market share is all.

intel will release the 64bit chip as soon as they are done milking the 32bit market, and not a second before.