No announcement yet.

Is 2.31 higher than the 3200+?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is 2.31 higher than the 3200+?

    I have a 1800+ @ 2.31, so is that higher than the 3200 speed?

  • #2
    Yes as an XP3200+ is clocked at 2.2GHz but whether it'll perform any better will depend on the FSB that ya runnin' at as the XP3200+ has twice the L2 cache that ya have.


    • #3
      On a side note, I've always wondered why AMD uses the somewhat confusing "+" system. Why not simply state how fast their processors are in GHz like Intel?

      I know the answer's probably out there somewhere, but...the opportunity presents itself. ;)


      • #4
        Ok the ratin' system came about simply so uneducated ppl just don't see the MHz speed and think that P4's are faster just because they have a higher MHz speed when infact Athlons perform 9 instructions per cycle while P4's only perform 6. But the newer P4C's with HT and their 200MHz quad pumped FSB are better than the Athlon XP's now.


        • #5
          Yeah, I assumed it was something like that. Thanks for the info.


          • #6
            What is AMD's PR Rating system about?

            A Performance Rating system is an alternative way of assessing CPU speed, instead of just looking at clockspeed. Intel and AMD have adhered to pure MHz ratings until recently. The way an AMD CPU is designed it generally runs at lower clockspeeds than its intel counterpart, while maintaining similar performance. This is because AMD claims their instructions per cycle (IPC) is higher, meaning that per MHz an AMD CPU ‘does more.’ While that may not be a hard concept the grasp, not everyone is aware of it. AMD revived the PR in an attempt to make the CPUs total performance more apparent. Their claim is that the PR rating on a chip denotes how fast an AMD Athlon ‘Thunderbird” processor would have to be to match the rated chip. For instance, according to the system, an Athlon XP 2400+ running at 2GHz would be equivalent to a 2.4GHz thunderbird. Of course there is no such thing as a 2.4GHz thunderbird, so AMD is using a formula to determine the ratings now.
            Coincidence or not? While AMD says the ratings align the AXP against tbirds, it is surprisingly accurate when compared to intel’s Pentium 4 CPUs. While it is not dead on perfect, the rating is close. If you compare a 2400+ and 2.4GHz P4 you should find the performance of the two CPUs to be similar. Recently intel has moved to an 800MHz FSB on the i865 and i875 chipsets. This has seemingly thrown a monkey wrench into directly comparing the AMD ratings to intel MHz. The new Pentium 4 3.0C is consistently faster than the AMD Athlon XP 3000+. It is unlikely the scale will be fixed since both companies will soon be switching to new architectures.
            In the end the point of PR ratings is marketing. The average consumer (which makes up the vast majority of the market) does not understand IPC and MHz. They see ‘2.6GHz Pentium 4’ and they see ‘2.13GHz Athlon XP.’ Guess which one the average customer picks. Using PR ratings now the decision is between ‘2.6GHz Pentium 4’ and they see ‘Athlon XP 2600+.’ Annoying marketing tactic? Necessary? Evil? No one knows

            More information

            OC faq


            • #7
              why dosnt intel just get there cpu's to get 9 instructions per cycle then? or is it harder then i think it is?
              MOTHER BOARD : GIGABYTE K8N-SLI NForce 4
              PROCESSOR: AMD X2 3800+
              GRAPHICS CARD: EVGA 7800GT 256mb
              PSU: Enermax 535W
              MEMORY: Kingston 4x 512 pc3200 = 2GB
              Hard Drive: Seagate 300GB HDD 7,2000 RPM
              MONITOR: 19" Sony
              windows XP: home


              • #8
                Originally posted by [MSB
                why dosnt intel just get there cpu's to get 9 instructions per cycle then? or is it harder then i think it is?
                architecture change and so on, large matter to change