May 15th, 2000, 02:50 PM
AMD Athlon 850 MHz Review
AMD's Athlon CPU has been out for over a year now and its new x86 architecture seems to have quite a bit of headroom left, as the Athlon has already passed the 1 GHz milestone. In this review, however, we will review a less elusive member of the Athlon family and take a closer look at the 850 MHz Athlon.
May 19th, 2000, 05:21 PM
I consider this to be a fair article on the Athlon.
The only slight quibble I have with it is the comment Sander makes where he says "things should be looking up for AMD" once Duron/SPitfire and Thunderbird come out.." Er... that implies to me that AMD hasnt done well wit the Athlon origianl.. seeing as the company has had its first back to back profit making quarters in a long time - and about a billion $ revenue to boot last quarter with a lot of the credit going to Athlon.. I'd say things have been looking up for AMD for a while.
May 20th, 2000, 02:46 PM
I tend to disagree, this was not a very fair review of the Athlon 850MHz.
Seen on the Sandra test, the 850Mhz was performing at the same speed as the reference 600Mhz!!!
Anand tested the 850Mhz and several other CPU's in a detailed article, here the 850Mhz is clearly faster than the 600Mhz (as should be), see this link: http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1171&p=7
If the purpose of this "test" was to compare the Athlon to PIII or to older Athlons was never really made clear since there were no test comparisons for any other CPU's. How can you make any conclusions by only testing ONE CPU???
Sander also didn't mention the possible non-upgrade to these higher performing parts for existing Slot-A customers.
If you want to make a price comparison to show that this CPU is too expensive or priced right, then please reference some prices.
The Duron is 128kb L1 and 64kb L2, while Thunderbird is 128kb L1 and 256kb L2. The L2 on both CPUs is running at 100% CPU speed. Both Duron and Thunderbird will be announced in Computex Taipei June 5th. (no need to wait couple of months)
DDR speed is 266Mhz and not 133MHz.
Due to the lack of comparison on the performance of different chipsets with this CPU, performance difference between other CPUs and price comparison. Only two benchmarks were tested.
I think that this review was rather pointless and gives no meaningful value.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)