On The Insider: Swift & Kanye Named Best of the Year
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 10 of 19:
Next »
« Previous
The marketing result of raw processor speed limits.
Since Intel is starting to run into a ceiling on raw processor speed where the "cost:performance" ratio is becoming a barrier, they have to change the metric in order to contiue to compete.

They build business based on metrics, and they need to have one that shows constant growth in order to churn the customer base. They can't survive on new sales alone. They must drive both new sales and replacement sales in order to survive. Since the old metric of clock speed is slowing and will eventually max out, they need to institute something else to push sales.

So this is no more than a marketing response to a physical reality - Intel's maxing out on raw processor speed. They need to sell the next generation of chips based on something else and this new numbering system is just that "something else".

I don't really think anyone will be fooled.

After all, AMD did this same sleight-of-hand replacing real metrics with random numbers when they couldn't compete on speed anymore and nobody was fooled then.

What we really need is a set of metrics that, acting together, tell us what the performance of a system is likely to be : we need the processor speed, the number of instructions executed per cycle, the latency of the memory, and the response time of the front-side bus.

Even this is an oversimplification, but it would do a lot more to help consumers make informed decisions than the random number schemes that AMD and Intel have cooked-up. Which is why they will never do it ... real metrics would demonstrate that we never needed to replace last year's computer in the first place, not to mention that "ancient" P2 or K6-2 that's sitting down in your basement.

Regards,
Jon
Posted by: JonathonDoe   Posted on: 03/18/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Great concept and a viable idea  US Chistian | 03/17/04
as long as the number are real  JWatson77 | 03/17/04
Huh...  Patrick Jones | 03/18/04
Bogus marketing BullStuffing!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 03/17/04
I stopped counting when it reaches 20  toomuchgreeatea@... | 03/17/04
Clock speed is meaningless, BUT  toomuchgreeatea@... | 03/17/04
one meaningless number...  ryusen | 03/17/04
Intelligence  Taco Warrior | 03/17/04
Logical move as Pentium 4 is dying...  Bertavenger | 03/18/04
The marketing result of raw processor speed limits.  JonathonDoe | 03/18/04
BullHockey  HDS_CC | 03/18/04
OK, so it's psuedo-random.  JonathonDoe | 03/18/04
you may be right  HDS_CC | 03/19/04
Clockspeed alone is the the most bogus of metrics...  MrEMann | 03/18/04
MrEMann, we agree...  JonathonDoe | 03/18/04
Clock speed has always be bogus  voska | 03/18/04
Cross line metric  James Dean_z | 03/18/04
How often is the processor the bottleneck anyway  Burnsie001 | 03/18/04
What Apple and Mac users have been saying  MacCanuck | 03/19/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

IT Solutions for 2010

  • Get cost-effective strategies and roadmaps on the most important issues facing IT leaders in 2010! Learn how to easily cut costs and deliver greater efficiency starting with your database, IT compliance management and data center. Visit the IT Leaders Dashboard. Visit the IT Leaders Dashboard.
  • Read about top issues IT decision-makers face every day, plus get cost effective solutions to real life IT problems. Oracle Topline