Do you have enough Cache?

[aint skierd]

As it was explained to me, just as Miller said the number is meant to reflect a comparable performance.
The whole marketing thing that Miller cautions is found throughout merchandising.
Take the auto industry. The Ford Power-Stroke rated @ 400 HP. Yeah, but they don't bother to explain that the rating was performed on a test stand at near top end with no load.( nothing attached to it.) God knows what fuel they were using...
Put that behind a drive train in a vehicle on a dynamometer and you get about 160HP to the rubber.
Manufacturers tend to obfuscate or manipulate the facts by choosing their own standard to judge themselves against.

My Brother-in-law in the audio industry for thirty years says the manufacturers flat out lie.

[Miller]

lying, advertising...po-tay-to, po-tah-to

[SuperG]

Well, it seems that if you look at benchmark comparisons, they aren't even close on some of their estimates....but yeah I'd say that's the fox running the hen house.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

Again, this assumes all the numbers are understood......

[SpHeRe31459]

The problem is AMD makes no claims that those numbers mean anything against the competition, their ratings are based against other AMD products. They put that disclaimer around their website and generally on most reseller's sites too.

Anyway yes the general idea even if AMD won't admit it is that a Sempron 3400+ is in the same neck of the woods as a Celeron ~3.4Ghz. As you can see this varies highly on the benchmark you want to choose.

The problem with that Tom's thing, I almost posted the link last night, is that it doesn't include Celerons I noticed. The closest approximation to a 3Ghz Celeron D is going to be a the Intel Pentium 4 3.06GHz Northwood, 3066/133, 850E, RD1066. Choose that and say the Sempron 3100+ (Palermo Core).

Also if you want to go the Intel route because you feel safer/more familiar go for it. I just wanted you to know the facts about your CPU choices.

[SuperG]

Also if you want to go the Intel route because you feel safer/more familiar go for it. I just wanted you to know the facts about your CPU choices.

The kicker is I'd LOVE to try an AMD processor and lose the heat. I just can't make heads or tails of what I'm looking at and can't relate it to what I DO know. It looks like that Semperon you posted smokes the Celeron I posted, but its $30 more (not a big deal) and it doesn't give me the upgrade path the 775 socket does.

As a penny pincher I like to be able to maximize my paltry investment. 

[SpHeRe31459]

Also if you want to go the Intel route because you feel safer/more familiar go for it. I just wanted you to know the facts about your CPU choices.

The kicker is I'd LOVE to try an AMD processor and lose the heat. I just can't make heads or tails of what I'm looking at and can't relate it to what I DO know. It looks like that Semperon you posted smokes the Celeron I posted, but its $30 more (not a big deal) and it doesn't give me the upgrade path the 775 socket does.

As a penny pincher I like to be able to maximize my paltry investment. 

Just an FYI the only upgrade path you'll have with a current 775 motherboard is from one hot P4 to another. The new architecture generation called "Conroe" I spoke of before is so different that while it physically uses socket 775 it is not compatible with any current motherboard/chipset except possibly the newest Intel 975X based mobos, but they are 1. incredibly expensive and 2. not guaranteed.link.

While it is low-end, AMD  has committed to supporting Socket 754 until 2008. link.

[SuperG]

Thats good to hear on the AMD side of things.

The MB I was looking at ran from Celeron D up to current DuoCore 775, I figured a PVR wouldn't need that much juice anytime soon.

How we are supposed to stay on top of all of it and have any semblence of a life is beyond me.

[SpHeRe31459]

Thats good to hear on the AMD side of things.

The MB I was looking at ran from Celeron D up to current DuoCore 775, I figured a PVR wouldn't need that much juice anytime soon.

How we are supposed to stay on top of all of it and have any semblence of a life is beyond me.

Just to be clear, the purpose of Conroe has nothing to do with "juice" -- meaning raw clock speed and everything to do with efficency and using less "juice" -- meaning AC/DC power. Conroe is considered a very good thing by the entire PC industry. The dual-core CPUs a current S775 board can use are basically two hot chips shoved together in one.

You are getting too hung up on raw clockspeed and not seeing the many variables that make performance. Notice Intel has implemented a rating code much as AMD has? Intel isn't focusing on raw clockspeed any more, it doesn't mean much in the long term. Intel's lust for raw clockspeed in the early 2000's lead to nothing but a CPU that traded efficiency for raw clockspeed, thus appearing fast to the average Joe who doesn't know any better. Conroe will debut with clockspeeds very similar to AMDs current offerings (ie: ~1.8Ghz to 2.8Ghz).

[aint skierd]

We could not keep up with the developments and do much else, which is why we need to rely on the others here in the forum. Collectively, we are a force.
 

Edit; and when we're not, there is always Sphere

[Crim]

Also if you want to go the Intel route because you feel safer/more familiar go for it. I just wanted you to know the facts about your CPU choices.

The kicker is I'd LOVE to try an AMD processor and lose the heat. I just can't make heads or tails of what I'm looking at and can't relate it to what I DO know. It looks like that Semperon you posted smokes the Celeron I posted, but its $30 more (not a big deal) and it doesn't give me the upgrade path the 775 socket does.

Dude, have you seen Intel's new naming scheme? You want talk about confusing then just take a look at them.

[aint skierd]

Hi Crim, Welcome.

It would seem that the chip makers view of a successful moniker depends on the degree of ambiguity and obfuscation conveyed during an attempted comparison with the competition.

Give me a good benchmark to see apples to apples.

[SpHeRe31459]

Give me a good benchmark to see apples to apples.

Here here!

[Crim]

Hi Crim, Welcome.

It would seem that the chip makers view of a successful moniker depends on the degree of ambiguity and obfuscation conveyed during an attempted comparison with the competition.

Ah but thats part of the fun. Who would have thought that you'd need some sort of decoder ring to figure out what speed a CPU is or other basic features? I don't think that AMD's rating system was terrible complex but Intel's naming scheme really has me scratching my head. Oh the days when a 2.8C P4 simply meant a 2.8Ghz Northwood.

Give me a good benchmark to see apples to apples.

Damn right but then you've got issues with what compiler was used for the benchmark app and if it favors one CPU architecture over another. But generally you've got certain CPUs that are better in certain areas like A64s and gaming or Intel and multimedia creation. I believe it's best to look at a CPU on those terms and then figure out which one "wins" for your situation. For HTPCs right now that means that AMD gets the nod since they're CPUs are more then competive performance-wise with Intel and run much cooler then the Prescott family of chips. The biggest advantage Intel has (IMO) is based on price, they're pretty much just giving those chips away now but Conroe will be next in line for HTPC use pretty soon IMO.

Oh and thanks for the welcome, generally I hang out at HTPCnews but I tended to lurk around here from time to time.

[aint skierd]

Yes, I'm familiar with your posts from the HTPC News.

You bring with you a valuable knowledge base that will serve to make this community stronger because of your participation. Thank you!
Great bunch of people around here. I'm here a few months short of a year, and it's like an extended family to me.

Benchmark....Such a difference in architecture... it would be cool if the computer industry could do something like racing. The IROC, International Race Of Champions, where drivers are given identical cars. The only variable is skill of the driver.
A standard machine configuration with the only difference being the card, chip or software being evaluated.