Ineresting the AMD 2500 is a slower clock than the 2400

[Aaron]

I don't use AMD's for specifically this reason.  The VP of Marketing from
AMD and I had a discussion about this 10 years ago with the 486's.  They
wanted to call their dx2-80 a dx4-100 because the performance was equivalent
(in their opinion).  I spent a three hour lunch explaining to him why that
was wrong.  Now they're doing it with the Thunderbirds.  It's confusing at
best and misleading at worst.

the performance issue on this is a bus speed issue.  Of course a 266 bus is
going to be slower then a 333 bus.  It doesn't really matter what the
processor speed is.  All people look at is the price and the "number"
(notice I didn't say speed).

Aaron

----- Original Message -----
From: <numa at thenuma.com>
To: <kclug at kclug.org>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 9:29 AM
Subject: Re: Ineresting the AMD 2500 is a slower clock than the 2400

> Same thing happened from T-bred a --> B.  I have the tbred B2400 running
> at 2200 Mhz.  :)
>
> Kris
>
> >
> >
> > ATHLON XP 2500 CPU: 1.83 GHz
> > 266 Bus
> > ATHLON XP 2400 XP 2400 Thoroughbred
> > 333 Bus
> > Info from www.newegg.com catalog
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>