SPEC CPU 2000(SpecInt) for AMD K8 "ClawHammer"

[Hammer]

Some what relates to the "Amiga x86".

PEC CPU 2000(SpecInt) for AMD K8 "ClawHammer",  click here

==========================================
AMD  K8 "ClawHammer" 3400+ = 1350
Intel Pentium 4(Northwood)  3Ghz = 1000
IBM Power4 1.3 Ghz = 800
AMD  Athlon XP 2000+, 1.67Ghz = 730
...
==========================================

PS: Unverified source.

[Rodney]

AMD K8 "ClawHammer" 3400+ = 1350

Is that in Gigs? Because it looks very similar to AMD's naming convention to hide the fact their CPUI's arnt as fast as Intels.

Yes, you may have noticed AMD started labeling their CPUs not in Gigs but 1300+ or something similar. 1300 pluss does not mean CPU Mhz or Ghz, its simply a marketing ploy.

So is that the actualy Mhz of the CPU or was this taken from the CPU package?

[Jost80]

1300+ means that it is as fast as a 1300Mhz Athlon with the old core.

[xeron]

Gosh. I wonder why Samface hasn't moaned about this not being relevant to Amiga users? Perhaps because its not about MorphOS?

Seems to me he just has a grudge...

(note: I am not a MOS fanatic, my philosphy is "wait and see").

[redrumloa]

1300 pluss does not mean CPU Mhz or Ghz, its simply a marketing ploy.

True but they are marketing to people who are absolutely clueless, so I understand why they do it. At least when AMD labels with 1900+ or whatever, it really is as fast or faster than a P4 at the same speed, unlike when Cyrix used to do the same thing.

[Calen]

Wonder how the forthcoming G5 will do against these new AMD  CPU's

[Hattig]

A pretty old article there.

AMD will be releasing benchmarks in October for the Clawhammer or the Sledgehammer. Presumably these will be running at full speed then.

FYI, a Clawhammer running in 32-bit mode (not 64-bit with all the extras) running the openssl speed benchmark at 800MHz performs between a 1GHz Athlon and a 1.4GHz Athlon. A 64-bit version, properly optimised, could run 4 times faster apparently (due to being able to reduce iterations by a factor of 4 because you have 64-bit integers to play with)! A 2GHz Clawhammer in 64-bit mode running this particular benchmark would perform like a 10GHz Athlon!

Of course, this is one single benchmark which can really benefit from going to 64-bit, most applications will see a 20% - 40% speedup over a similarly clocked Athlon.

[Tomas]

Is that in Gigs? Because it looks very similar to AMD's naming convention to hide the fact their CPUI's arnt as fast as Intels.

Isnt as fast as intels?? Mhz dosent mean a crap, i have a 1800mhz P4 sitting here and an old ahtlon 1.4ghz and guess what?? The athlon is WAY faster, even though the p4 has way higher mhz + even higher front side bus.

When they say the XP2000 is faster than intel, then they arent lying at all, its actually way faster.

[KPK]

If I only wanted speed, all my needs would be satisfied, but I want Amiga...  Gigahertz is like Watts in HiFi.  A 500 W amplifier can sound really bad compared to a 50 W amplifier. It's all about what you need it for. I need a useful computer that responds to me in the time I like. It's MS Windows fault PC's doesn't do that, not the Gigahertz in the processor...

Just my two cents..

[System]

"Isnt as fast as intels?? Mhz dosent mean a crap, i have a 1800mhz P4 sitting here and an old ahtlon 1.4ghz and guess what?? The athlon is WAY faster, even though the p4 has way higher mhz + even higher front side bus."

The P4 will trash the athlon at encoding etc .. why because of improvements and not just uping the core speed like AMD.

"When they say the XP2000 is faster than intel, then they arent lying at all, its actually way faster."

Intel think more about feature then speed for games like AMD , features like decent heat protection ... and the IA64 platform being a new , fresh platform unlike the previous X86 kludge and AMDs attempt.

My mate being a uni geek reads tech docs , he read the Intel ones for the P4 and found a new respect for the so called arseholes of the CPU market ... I'm not saying their gods , but they are advancing instead of just speeding up.

[KThunder]

advancing instead of speeding up?!?!?
intel chopped out their barrel shifters because they couldnt run at 1.35+ghz!  they cut out a full speed full size predecode cache and put in a 16kbyte (yes 16kbyt) post decode cache, when a post decode cache really needs to be larger since a single x86 intruction encodes to between 2 and 3 risc operations for the core. and they cut out one of the decode units. why? so that their core is smaller so they can pump the clock speed up.
basically intel chopped their cpu to bits so that they could speed their clock up since most people think of clock speed as the beall and endall of cpu performance.
if you are using code that is optimized just for the p4 it is faster than generic code. but the same goes for athlon, and generic code runs way faster on athlon than p4. especially stuff with lots of jumps wich screw up p4s decoder and cache setup or calculated address stuff that uses the hackedup shifter setup. :-o
oh just incase you were wondering i did read all the tech docs (white papers) from intel and amd.

[whabang]

AFAIK, AMD's biggest problem is that they can't pump the clock speed of the Athon much further.

[Temal]

It´s true that some apps, like Lightwave, are
slightly faster on Intel than on AMD, but Intel
are not cheap if you compare to AMD. As a test to
get Screamernet working I rendered a frame on
an P4 2 GHz and the same frame on an AMD 1700+.

The P4 got the work done in 4 minutes, where the
AMD was slightly slower, ended up at 6 min. But as
a friend told me: "If you want speed out of Lightwave,
go for Intel, as LW is optimized for this processor."

Well, I get speed, but for a price which I think is
too high.

[System]

Yeah their nameing convention is stupid.
they 'SAY" its a powermark relative to the t-birds that didnt have SSE2.....but we all know its to show relative performance to intel cpu's......
now that haveing been said.
The clawhammer is a 3400+
The P4 is a 3000mhz P4
(a fair benchmark would be to benchmark a Clawhammer 3000+ against the P4 at 3000mhz since AMD's useing this power rateing instead of mhz in this rateing their faster chip beats the P4 yeah but its not compareing a 3400mhz P4 to it)
Also dont forget that AMD's Clawhammer is 64bit that Intel P4 is 32bit...that fact that the gap is so small considering the AMD is both 64bit and 400 power rateing points ahead with such a small lead looks bad.

and Whabang's right AMD chips are not ramping up fast enough.
I went with AMD until the P4 northwood came out then i swtichted to a P4...the reason bieng i use Lightwave..and i wanted a cooler more quiet solution.
I got what i asked for. The P4 runs much cooler then my old AMD Athlon 1.2ghz did. and the price wasnt to bad considering i took a 1.8ghz P4 and ramped it to 2ghz without even changeing the cooling.
300$ cpu for 180$...gotta love it

I go for what i see is better at any given time. I'm not a person that gets stuck to one cpu or one platform. The first two generations of P4 sucked. This generation is great in my opinon. the micron process..the cooling needed...the non-delicate cpu...the speed is good ...and the apps i use are P4 apps.
Athlons are good and so are P4's ......I just prefer P4's because i was getting tired of my every shrinking office turning into a sweat shop heh.

[System]

also shows how pathetic the power4 is hahahahahah 800.,...omg...hahahaha