Battlefield Nation Forums - View Single Post

grim reaper · 01-31-2005, 02:12 PM

AMD XP ratings and their “real” clocking

64bit AMD64

Athlon64 3400 2.2Ghz 1024kb L2 cache
Athlon64 3200 2Ghz 1024kb L2 cache
Athlon64 3000 2Ghz 512kb L2 cache
Athlon64 2800 1.8Ghz 512kb L2 cache

Barton Core - 512kb L2 Cache.

Athlon XP 3200+ 2.20GHz 200MHz 11x Barton (L2 512KB)
Athlon XP 3000+ 2.10GHz 200MHz 10.5x Barton (L2 512KB)
Athlon XP 3000+ 2.16GHz 166MHz 13x Barton (L2 512KB)
Athlon XP 2800+ 2.08GHz 166MHz 12.5x Barton (L2 512KB)
Athlon XP 2600+ 1.91GHz 166MHz 11.5x Barton (L2 512KB)
Athlon XP 2500+ 1.83GHz 166MHz 11x Barton (L2 512KB)

Thoroughbred/Palamino Core - 256kb L2 Cache.

Athlon XP 2800+ 2.25GHz 333MHz 13.5x 0.13 Thoroughbred B
Athlon XP 2700+ 2.17GHz 333MHz 13x 0.13 Thoroughbred B
Athlon XP 2600+ 2.083GHz 166MHz 12.5x Thoroughbred B
Athlon XP 2600+ 2.133GHz 133MHz 16x Thoroughbred B
Athlon XP 2400+ 2.GHz 266MHz 15x 0.13 Thoroughbred B
Athlon XP 2200+ 1.8GHz 266MHz 13.5x 0.13 Thoroughbred A
Athlon XP 2100+ 1.73GHz 266MHz 13x 0.18 Palomino
Athlon XP 2000+ 1.67GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino
Athlon XP 1900+ 1.6GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino
Athlon XP 1800+ 1.53GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino
Athlon XP 1700+ 1.47GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino
Athlon XP 1600+ 1.4GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino
Athlon XP 1500+ 1.33GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino

Explanation of the XP rating

There is often confusion as to what these numbers mean, and why AMD do this. As I was briefed on this by AMD's UK Marketing Manager, I can give the correct and official explanation.

When AMD moved from the 'Thunderbird' class of Athlon to the XP, they included a number of technology enhancements in the core of the processor - this meant that a simple comparison between T'BIrd and XP processors on the basis on Megahertz alone would give very misleading results, and understate the actual performance of the XP.

If you compare an XP and a T'Bird running at the same clock speed, the XP will be significantly faster in actual performance.

So AMD did a huge series of benchmark tests using some 35 industry standard benchmarks on the XP's and T'Birds, and created a rating that compares relative performance of the XP with the speed a T'Bird would need to be to give that same performance.

Despite many pronouncements by people that should know better, including some magazines, it is NOT any form of a comparison to Intel processors, whether that be the P4 or anything else.

The logic behind this is that people want a yardstick to measure the performance they are actually paying for, and that clock speed (Megahertz) is no longer a good reflection of comparitive performance.

01-31-2005, 02:12 PM	#6 (permalink)
grim reaper Forum Moderator Brigadier General Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: England Posts: 7,256	AMD XP ratings and their “real” clocking 64bit AMD64 Athlon64 3400 2.2Ghz 1024kb L2 cache Athlon64 3200 2Ghz 1024kb L2 cache Athlon64 3000 2Ghz 512kb L2 cache Athlon64 2800 1.8Ghz 512kb L2 cache Barton Core - 512kb L2 Cache. Athlon XP 3200+ 2.20GHz 200MHz 11x Barton (L2 512KB) Athlon XP 3000+ 2.10GHz 200MHz 10.5x Barton (L2 512KB) Athlon XP 3000+ 2.16GHz 166MHz 13x Barton (L2 512KB) Athlon XP 2800+ 2.08GHz 166MHz 12.5x Barton (L2 512KB) Athlon XP 2600+ 1.91GHz 166MHz 11.5x Barton (L2 512KB) Athlon XP 2500+ 1.83GHz 166MHz 11x Barton (L2 512KB) Thoroughbred/Palamino Core - 256kb L2 Cache. Athlon XP 2800+ 2.25GHz 333MHz 13.5x 0.13 Thoroughbred B Athlon XP 2700+ 2.17GHz 333MHz 13x 0.13 Thoroughbred B Athlon XP 2600+ 2.083GHz 166MHz 12.5x Thoroughbred B Athlon XP 2600+ 2.133GHz 133MHz 16x Thoroughbred B Athlon XP 2400+ 2.GHz 266MHz 15x 0.13 Thoroughbred B Athlon XP 2200+ 1.8GHz 266MHz 13.5x 0.13 Thoroughbred A Athlon XP 2100+ 1.73GHz 266MHz 13x 0.18 Palomino Athlon XP 2000+ 1.67GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino Athlon XP 1900+ 1.6GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino Athlon XP 1800+ 1.53GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino Athlon XP 1700+ 1.47GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino Athlon XP 1600+ 1.4GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino Athlon XP 1500+ 1.33GHz 266MHz 0.18 Palomino Explanation of the XP rating There is often confusion as to what these numbers mean, and why AMD do this. As I was briefed on this by AMD's UK Marketing Manager, I can give the correct and official explanation. When AMD moved from the 'Thunderbird' class of Athlon to the XP, they included a number of technology enhancements in the core of the processor - this meant that a simple comparison between T'BIrd and XP processors on the basis on Megahertz alone would give very misleading results, and understate the actual performance of the XP. If you compare an XP and a T'Bird running at the same clock speed, the XP will be significantly faster in actual performance. So AMD did a huge series of benchmark tests using some 35 industry standard benchmarks on the XP's and T'Birds, and created a rating that compares relative performance of the XP with the speed a T'Bird would need to be to give that same performance. Despite many pronouncements by people that should know better, including some magazines, it is NOT any form of a comparison to Intel processors, whether that be the P4 or anything else. The logic behind this is that people want a yardstick to measure the performance they are actually paying for, and that clock speed (Megahertz) is no longer a good reflection of comparitive performance.