Page 1 of 1
Intel's PR Numbers
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 12:42 am
by THE JEW (RaVeN)
Anybody else think these are stupid? I've adapted to the AMD ones because they are essentially the equivalent Intel speed. However, the new ones Intel are putting out are just dumb:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=2012
Here's the latest list of them.
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 2:12 am
by [PX]IronFist
That is the worst naming convention ever, it doesn't appear to make any sense at all...I hope it is just for internal use and not for the public.
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 2:16 am
by THE JEW (RaVeN)
All indications seem to point to it going public as people are avoiding the Centrino line because they think it's a slow value line. I wish they'd just copy AMD's. I had my reservations about it before, but I think it works well now.
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 2:58 am
by [PX]IronFist
The only problem is what would Intel compare its chips too speed wise. AMD has Intel as a standard benchmark to name it self after...what does Intel have.
Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2004 3:26 pm
by THE JEW (RaVeN)
Generic numbers. There is no speed comparison, really. Just a relative scaling. That's why it's stupid.
"Holy Shiznit! That guy has an Intel 854!"

Posted: Tue May 18, 2004 11:34 pm
by THE JEW (RaVeN)
The Duron's dead:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=2056
Why is it posted here? AMD is now following Intel's lead with PR numbers.
Posted: Wed May 19, 2004 12:26 am
by [PX]IronFist
AMD's new chip; code named "Value" for now will eventually replace Duron, although specifications are hazy at best
How creative.
Posted: Wed May 19, 2004 12:19 pm
by Ghost [PX]
Oh how I pine for the day when buying a processor didnt require 4 years worth of research first...