AMD to Axe Athlon Name

[DavidT]

Originally Posted by name='doomie22'

and and intel should agree on a standard for the numbering

so an E6300 from intel, is equivilant to a 6300FX from amd, would sort out problems

I don't think that would help. Then people would assume both processors are the same and just get either one, when really both are completely different.

As for the name, I don't know. Sounds weird now, but I think we'll get used to it, just like "Vista".

[PP Mguire]

Buahah Windows ME lol. I remember when ppl said ME instead of M-E. Funny stuff. But still, i like Athlon. Its such a beefy cerative name.

[Allsorts]

Phenom, WTF??? Venom, possibly, but Phenom? I'll just call it K10 in protest .

[PP Mguire]

Hmm my K10 Venom against your Core2. THat sounds cool.

[NickS]

Welp... nothing we can do tbh.

[Rastalovich]

The idea some1 suggested about making the numbers co-incide together, almost as a way that the `user` can make a comparison -

I read, when the XP+ versions of the AMD numbers first saw light of day that that was precisely what they were all about. Not as simple as I suggest, but something like Athlon XP 2600+ was the equiv of an Intel processor (flavor of the time) run @ 2.6ghz.

Of course, doing it at an initial stage is all well and good, but as years go by the numbers become less and less comparible or important.

U can`t for example draw any conclusions about a 4400+ Athlon x2 in terms of an Intel - unless u could say it`d be equiv to an E4400, which I pretty much imagine it wouldn`t be. Before the E4300 ranges, when they popularly had just the E6300 - it perhaps could have been a semi-sensible suggestion - but then along come Intel to blow that idea away.