AMD K7 Athlon benchmarks

<font color=\"yellow\" size=\"2\" face=\"Arial,Verdana\">By: <b><a href=\"mailto:quantum_1@hotmail.com\">Quantum</a></b></font>
i like #14\'s comments
as for #4 and #7: go bitch elsewhere where i dont have to read it.

*cough* *cough*

Architecture maybe??? It is the way the processor does its job. If you want to read up on what makes it different then you may begin to see why certain apps utilize it better. It isn\'t just a clear-cut case of one processor totally kicking the others ass. Although it seems that the K7 has done a good job of beating Intel altogether (maybe not 30% across the board). Cheers to AMD for making a cheap, powerful processor when Intel didn\'t feel like we needed it.

If not then what is?

#9: Are you kidding? There\'s only an 9% clock speed difference between the Athlon 600 and P3 550. I think the 38% difference in the software-rendered Crusher demo is the most telling one of all, since we don\'t have to worry about the graphics card so much.

But clock speed isn\'t a good marker in comparing different chips.

hrm, i dunno how much is the new amd\'s going to be anyways? I think that will be a big issue, the p3\'s are way to much, so what does it really matter, heh

I\'m with \"rez\" (#2) on this one guys...

#3

Umm, when you compare a P3 550 to a K7 600 and see improvments of 40% in some cases, I think it\'s safe to say, clock for clock there is no difference.

Now for real P3s are not out yet. Umm, that\'s funny I can buy one.
You next comment is \"coppermine\"
My rebuttle is that copermine is a P3 on a 0.18 micron die. It\'s still the same instruction set and all of the ciruitry is scaled down. I love people on the \"coppermine\" band waggon that don\'t realize that the coppermine is no better than a P3 out right now.

your next comment might be copper.
Well, copper is going to be in everything soon. It\'s just evolutionary, just like the 0.18 micron die. K7 will have it to. Big deal.

Karl

#7, I think #4 was joking around. As for the benchmark copying, its a COMMON PRACTICE among news sites. That is about 1% of the information, as there are about 10 pages to the review there, and that is merely a snippet. Lighten up, man, it comes with the turf

#5, I think the point is that it\'s pretty lame to copy HTML straight from another person\'s page--they worked hard to make those benchmarks and it would suck to have people not even visit your page to see them. This case might be the exception though, because the source page was from France, and who here can speak French anyway?

#3, who cares about the mhz speed--the point is, the processor exists. If AMD can make a faster processor, it makes no difference what mhz it runs at. If they made it and it works, then it\'s perfectly fair.

#3, that is a very valid comment.

#4, You = Loser. Who the fuck cares if its linked or copied. Makes my life a whole lot easier, then again, i work, and have limited time to check out the page, I, along with hordes of others, unlike you, have 12 hours of sitting on your ass bitching because something was dumped on a page. If you haven\'t noticed, alot of the news on this page has a link + a few snippetts from the artical. If it interests me, im sure i\'ll click the link, if not forget it. You seem to be pre-historic enough not to realise that shugashack has always been about making the news and the site VERY use friendly. So, now i present to you, my free words of advice: Its people like you who are born grumpy, live grumpy, gripe about anything to get some attention (which i forgive myself for giving you), stop being a compuslsive whinner, and deal with it. Its a link, maybe a conversation piece, but in no manner is it something for you to gripe and complain about. You donna like it? Hit the fucking road jack.

I can\'t believe you copied the actual benchmarks from their site, that\'s pretty low. I don\'t think I\'ve ever seen that done before. maybe next the shack writes up some articles people should copy it on their site instead of linking to it.

I\'m not taking sides but is it raelly fair to compare a 600mhz clocked processor to one thats 550?

sure, you could just scale it, but theres more to processor \"speed\" then just clock speed..

the p2 chips are exponentially better then the pentium chips, as ar ethe k6-x series then th k5\'s..

the p3\'s arent even on to copper yet.. the real p3\'s don\'t come out till later this year
the pentium 3\'s out now are just p2\'s with a third line on \'em

Where the hell are the Commander Keen benchmarks!? I refuse to believe this as actual if I dont have proof that Commander Keen was a benchmarking utility. In all seriousness, those are some sweet numbers, but will 90+ fps get me da chickz?

Someone should note that the performance of the AMD chip may not be represented by these high res benchmarks. While in actuality the CPU has alot to do with the ability of a computer to play at high resolutions, it is obvious that the graphics card is keeping the fps down in this trial. I would guess that the AMD would 20%-30% faster against the p3-550 in high res. as well if they had a next generation gfx card to use.