toggle

AAPL Stock: 570.56 ( + 13.59 )

Intel to move away from megahertz

updated 04:45 am EST, Mon March 22, 2004

Intel drops megahertz myth


Intel plans to of its processors and will stop using clock speed as the primary means of distinguishing performance, The Wall Street Journal reports [paid subscription required]. The new numbering scheme will be more akin to what is found in the automobile industry, employing a variety of factors to assign a number to a chip, including architecture, frequency, speed, built-in memory, and forthcoming technologies. What was previously a Pentium M 2GHz could be known as a Pentium M 755, the article notes.

"[Intel's naming change shows that] megahertz is dead and they are admitting it," Pat Moorhead, an AMD vice president of corporate marketing, told the Journal. For more than two years, both Apple and AMD have been attacking the "megahertz myth," which, largely through marketing, has inaccurately led many consumers to believe that clock speed is the main determinant of performance. AMD, whose Athlon chips run at lower clock speeds but can match the performance of Intel chips running at higher clock speeds, replaced clock speed with a naming system that more or less reflected the chip's equivalent Pentium performance in megahertz.

Intel itself has also been a victim of the megahertz myth that it fueled: the company's high-end Xeon processor runs more than 1GHz slower than its fastest Pentium 4, while the Itanium 2, also a high-performance server-targeted processor, tops out at 1.5GHz.


by MacNN Staff

toggle

Comments

  1. electroJerm

    Forum Regular

    Joined: Jun 2000

    0

    wow

    Finally... I have been dreaming of this day for years.

  1. kw99

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Nov 2001

    0

    But will Apple and AMD...

    be allowed to describe it's CPUs using the same numbering conventions. Otherwise, what's the point. I guess Intel wants a way for Itanium to have a higher number then Pentium 4, but it would be meaningless if the consumer wanted to compare an Intel chip with one from AMD or Apple (IBM).

  1. Avenir

    Mac Elite

    Joined: Jan 2000

    0

    Ease of use

    There has to be some way to advertise ease of use. Maybe with "X out of 5 Thumbs Up" heh, or something.

  1. jscotta

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jun 2002

    0

    Re: Apple and AMD/Intel

    "... if the consumer wanted to compare an Intel chip with one from AMD or Apple (IBM)."

    That is the problem with MHz to begin with. They were *nearly* (not totally but nearly) useless in comparing chips from the various makers. As Intel is discovering, it is useless when comparing different chip lines in the same company.

    I don't know the answer to the problem of comparing systems, however, I suspect that we need to look at the *total* system performance and get off the fixation with only certain parts in our comparisons.

  1. VR6

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Nov 2001

    0

    Intel on the right track

    Although this may feel like good news it is actually news that Intel is changing with the times and is not going to go down. (Not that Intel's success is necessarilly bad news, but this is a Mac forum.)

    Intel is in serious danger of becoming like GM and they know it. GM was incredibly successful at making bigger, faster cars right up until the energy crisis in the late 70s. Then, when the rules changed and people wanted fuel economy, performance (as defined by more than just straight line accelleration), safety, uniqueness, etc. the imports carved GM up like a Christmas turkey. (This is even more true for Ford or Chrysler, the latter of which became property of Daimler Benz).

    Intel has similarly made bigger, faster chips every year. But needs are changing. The speed the chips now deliver is much more than what the typical customer (a business desktop) needs. More importantly, as mobile computing and embedded processors become the growth categories in the industry, big, hot chips are a bad thing. AMD has actually missed a big opportunity to create a low power consumption processor for portables that would deliver longer battery life.

    If intel is changing the names it may mean they are getting ready to offer the right product too to all the new markets. May be tough going for IBM and AMD. We will see.

  1. kerryb

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Aug 2001

    0

    Car comparison is wrong.

    Computers in cars have little in common when it comes to marketing and I'm amazed how many people use the auto industry as a mirror to the computer industry. Intel has been the market leader for several years now and it's dominance has been very closely tied to it's relationship with Microsoft. Most PC boxes had "Intel inside" to start with and the clever people at Intel made this part of their marketing campaign. When the P3 pulled ahead of the G3, Intel gave it back to Apple (remember Apple's snail ad) and I think realized megahertz speed was a great marketing angle that would work on any customer that could understood 3 was more (powerful) than 2. I'm not sure the new processor labeling system will work as well as the easy to understand megahertz system. PC's for the most part are not luxury items, although Apple is the only company that has come close to provide the luxury item in the industry. I don't think Intel will be able to un-train the masses to think different when it come to replacing one generic box with another because 7xx is better 7xx. Intel will have to find another angle to get their customers worked up, maybe something like " guaranteed to work with Longhorn" whenever that may be.

  1. Toyin

    Mac Elite

    Joined: Nov 2000

    0

    Ha,ha,ha,ha

    Intel has been pushing 'mhz is everything' for the past few years. Now that they've reached the ceiling with their outdated architecture they've realized that pushing mhz may now backfire on them. As more efficient chips not only do more work per cycle, but will soon surpass their chips in mhz as well.

  1. z10n

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Oct 2003

    0

    Can we get a big...

    hahahaha?!

    Looks like Intel finally caved in on their own FUD. They realized that they can't punch up clock speeds any faster, so they had to resort to this. Nice.

    The only annoying thing is that now their marketing guys will have field day making bogus claims about processor speed, without the unnecessary requirement of having to back up those claims with actual numbers. Look for "Intel Super-Giga-Fast processor!" and other such bullsh!t in the coming months.

  1. Blinger

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Sep 2003

    0

    everbody chill...

    ...this isn't news that affects apple one way or the other.

    all apple cares about these days is selling more ipods...

  1. testudo

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Aug 2001

    0

    3.4 GHz

    Yet they just released a 3.4 GHz Prescott chip. Apparently for no other reason than to brag on speed (and maybe someone insisted a computer should double as a space heater). From Ars-Technica:

    Scores of benchmarks and loads of analysis don't change some very simple facts, especially the fact that these updates' value are primarily defined by how much you value a (very, very) slight increase in performance coupled with a (more than) slight increase in system temperature (78 degrees Centigrade [172 F!] at least gets you bragging rights).

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

 
close
Photo
toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

iHome iW2 AirPlay speaker

iHome generally isn't known as a luxury brand when it comes to audio, but it is prolific -- the company's docks and speakers are every ...

Logitech Ultrathin Keyboard Cover

One of the iPad's main weaknesses has always been productivity. It's not a question of apps; while it has taken a little time for a na ...

Logitech UE Air Speaker

If maybe a little more slowly than Apple would like, AirPlay is becoming a staple of the wireless speaker market for iOS devices. The ...

toggle

Most Commented