"". The idea was a 3200+ rated AMD was comparable to a P4 3.2 Ghz piece etc."
I knew what AMD's "theory" in naming their CPU's was but I have always felt it is simply misleading & a blatent attempt to make thier product sound better then it is.
When AMD started that I wonder how many people were disappointed to find out their spiffy new "3200+" CPU was actualy 2.2GHz.
Calling a 2.2GHz CPU "3200+" didn't make it "as fast" as a Intel 3.2GHz in the real world.
That is one of the reasons I don't like AMD .
If you go here,http://www.cpubenchmark.net/mid_range_cpus.html
& compare the Athlon XP 3200+ to a Pentium 4 3.2GHz you will see the difference.
I am comparing the Athlon XP 3200+ to the P4 to keep it real.
The Athon XP is the CPU that AMD originally released & claimed was rated "3200+" because it is "equal to a P4 3.2"
the later Athlon 64 3200+ was STILL a tad slower.
Athlon XP 3200+ = 446
[Athlon 64 3200+ =486]
Pantium 4 3.2GHz = 510
Keep in mind "almost as fast" doesn't count .
AMD rated thier CPU's as the equivalent
of the Intel's
That 64 points difference in the rating may not look like much but in the real world it's noticable .
BTW, To find the Athlon XP 3200+ simply go to the bottom of the chart.
Edited by fairjoeblue, 29 July 2009 - 03:18 PM.
OCZ StealthXstream 700W,Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3R , E8500, Arctic Freezer Pro 7, 3GB G.Skill PC8500,Gigabyte Radeon HD 4850 OC [1GB ], Seagate 250GB SATA II X2 in RAID 0, Samsung SATA DVD burner.