Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hype.it" data-source="post: 36372" data-attributes="member: 4085">The Megahertz theory of computers doesn't work with Newer PowerMacs, here's why:&nbsp;Source: <a href="http://arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/risc-cisc/rvc-6.html" target="_blank">arstechnica.com</a>It's like, when you look and compare the clock speed (Megahertz) between lets say, the Intel Processors and AMD's and you see 'Athlon blah blah 3000' as oppose to Intel 'Pentium blah 3 Ghz, blah-mine'. You automatically assume the AMD is also running at 3 Ghz, right? This in-fact is what the AMD is equivalent to, the actual Megahertz cycle is lower. More like 2.65Ghz or 2.8Ghz.Don't believe me? Ask an PC user. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />If you wanna compare 'Megahertz', then let me ask you this... Do you think the MIPS R16000 @ 700 MHz is slower than say the Intel's Xeon Processors, which clock in at 3.xxGhz+ ??</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hype.it, post: 36372, member: 4085"] The Megahertz theory of computers doesn't work with Newer PowerMacs, here's why: [size=1]Source: [url=http://arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/risc-cisc/rvc-6.html]arstechnica.com[/url][/size] It's like, when you look and compare the clock speed (Megahertz) between lets say, the Intel Processors and AMD's and you see 'Athlon blah blah 3000' as oppose to Intel 'Pentium blah 3 Ghz, blah-mine'. You automatically assume the AMD is also running at 3 Ghz, right? This in-fact is what the AMD is equivalent to, the actual Megahertz cycle is lower. More like 2.65Ghz or 2.8Ghz. Don't believe me? Ask an PC user. ;) If you wanna compare 'Megahertz', then let me ask you this... Do you think the [i]MIPS R16000 @ 700 MHz[/i] is slower than say the Intel's Xeon Processors, which clock in at 3.xxGhz+ ?? [/QUOTE]

Verification

Name this item. 🍎