Thoughts on AMD marketing

[pacmania_2001]

Have a look at this:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011009/tc/tech_amd_athlon_dc_2.html

Just wondering what your thoughts are, personally I think it is shit

[vitualis]

There's a good review of the new AthlonXP processors at Tom's Hardware as well.

I personally don't like the new PR system either. However, I'm very disappointed to see that AMD is basically pushing the PC scene to "hide" the true clock speed of the processor.

If AMD had a better/smarter marketing department, the lower clock speed yet better performing and cheaper processor angle could be used greatly to its advantage as it would undermine all new P4s if the general perception of the Athlon was that it was simply better.

Instead, there is now this arbitary number which I think does a disservie to the Athlon. For example, the AMD 1800+ (1533 or was it 1566? Mhz) is faster than the 2GHz P4 on most test but it would be impossible for them to market it as such.

As an aside, there is good news for P4 enthusists. SiS just released a new DDR chipset for the P4 and its performance is damn close to the Intel850 (with RDRAM). Go to http://www.tomshardware.com for the actual review.

Regards.

[pacmania_2001]

I too think that they should have used the speed difference in a marketing campaign instead of resorting to this scheme. It will cause new buyers to think that they are getting something they are not. I think this will just help Intel gain an even bigger market slice.

[DiViNeLeFT]

i dont think the speed rating thing has anything to do with AMDs troubles... i think lack of advirtising does... have you ever seen an AMD commercial?? i know that if you say yes you are talking about the one with the train.. they have 1 commercial!! the average joe blow "i am gunna buy a processor" doesnt look at benchmarks... they look at who can afford little blue guys hitting PVC piping in the shape of a 4!!

[gf]

I agree with DiViNeLeFT , the stupid people on buy on Mhz/Ghz clock speed and they do not read benchmarks. I don't like PR numbers either , but AMD had to do something and they were very loose with their PR numbers. If it was your company against INTEL what would you do? Give the stupid people what they want.

[pacmania_2001]

If my company was running up against Intel then I still wouldnt use the PR system. I would launch a marketing campaign that shows how a 1.4 gig Athlon can beat a higher clock speed P4 so that the consumer could make a choice. I also dont agree with the ratings. Will a AMD 1800+ match an Intel P4 1.8 gig on everything. I dont think so, especially when more programs start using the SSE2 extensions.

If I was Intel right now i would exploit this in their ratings showing what the actual clockspeed is and how the PR rating isnt accurate.

[Sefy]

Personaly I have no complaints about the new PR rating, mostly cause it uses the same program Intel uses to get their numbers, mainly the SPECint2000, which is a standardized way to show the performance of a CPU, and for people who buy numbers, and don't tell me there are no people like that, cause unfortunatly MOST people do buy numbers, it's a great way to choose a CPU, instead of buying a 1.5ghz P4, they will choose a 1.5ghz Athlon because they will know that for cheaper price they will get the same speed as Intel's leading product.

And i've also read somewhere on the web that AMD isn't hiding the true number of the CPU, that it's still on the CPU right along with the PR rating, the PR is just for those who buy numbers

[SatStorm]

Basicly, it is the way Europeans / Americans and Asians buy PCs.
In Europe we read, analyse, ask. We build pc's ourselfs...
In US, they buy ready PCs. You are a technology freak if you make it yourself.
Asia PC market, is a combination of those 2. They do read and they also buy ready PCs.
So AMD had to do something for the US Market. And on a market which numbers counts more than perfomance, AMD named their proccessors with numbers. That was clever. You think like american buyer to understand, not like european

[vitualis]

<TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD><font size=-1>Quote:</font><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR><TR><TD><FONT SIZE=-1><BLOCKQUOTE>
On 2001-10-11 04:16:55, Sefy wrote:
And i've also read somewhere on the web that AMD isn't hiding the true number of the CPU, that it's still on the CPU right along with the PR rating, the PR is just for those who buy numbers
</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR size=1 color=black></TD></TR></TABLE>

Are you sure of this Sefy? I believe AMD is doing their BEST to hide the true clockrate. I'm pretty sure that the clockrate is not written on the CPU.

Furthermore, AMD is not officially supporting any mobo where the BIOS shows the real clockrate -- only those that show the "model number".

Regards.

[Sefy]

vitualis, i'm sure about the true speed on the CPU as i've seen a few samples, I don't know how it is in the US though, so I can't answer that, as for BIOS, in my EPoX board it gives me the real BusXmultiplier and the product number, those who want to do math can figure it out