It dosen´t metter witch CPU is the best.
I tought Intel has the best CPU of all time but this is not true.

I think AMD makes very good CPU´s too.
I think IBM makes good CPU´s because they are chosen from Nintendo.
Every CPU is good in a special way.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Gim on 2002-02-07 20:55 ]</font>

and how is you mom?!


http://www.neo3.da.ru

mmmmmmmm more cheese

Intel sucks. For perfromance/price you cant beat AMD and Crusoe. For market penetration with high perf/price you cant beat AMD

AMD does more work per clock cycle. So AMD only have to keep pace with spIntel to beat them hands down every time (i know compilers for p4 are thin on the ground and could change this)

So not only is AMD cheaper, but clock for clock they beat spIntel anyway. This is why spIntel have to keep clocking their chips to stupid speeds and market based on those stupid speeds. They have NO other figure. Not that the CPU speed is a real one anyway now.

Architecture are becoming super-scalar. They execute many out-of-sequence operations at once. It is how efficiently you can do this that seperates processors these days. Raw clock speed is not the be all and end all.

(ipcc = instruction per clock cycle
ips = intructions per second)

For example if processor A runs at 2 Ghz and executes 2 ipcc then it is executing 2x2 = 4billion instruction per second.

If processor B runs at 1.5Ghz and executes 3ipcc it is executing 1.5x3 = 4.5 billion instructions per second - runs cooler but is a bitch to market (where AMD is now)

And if you do some more maths it becomes very obvious that you only need to make point increases in ipcc to make a huge difference in ips. Which is where AMD has been concentrating its efforts, where spIntel has been cranking the clock ever higher in an effort to melt your house down. :roll: