Don't be sucked in or even fooled into the whole 'MHz war'. Clock speed, whilst an important and determinant factor when comparing x86s CPUs, isn't the only issue. With different architectures being an important variable (OEMs please take note) it goes much deeper than that. For example a Pentium III with a faster frequency than an AMD Athlon has been shown to be actually slower in some cases with 3D Studio MAX under Windows NT 4.0 thanks in the most part to the strong FPU of the Athlon architecture. OEMs need to realize that looking only at the frequency of an x86 CPU simply won't suffice. Until systems are priced based on real world performance, it will still be up to us as consumers to do the research..
With the holiday season almost in full swing we're confident this will be the final stand in the 12 round (month?) fight. Obviously with Willamette and Mustang on the way in 2000, we can expect Intel vs. AMD: Fight II. In the meantime, let's put aside the Sharky Extreme consumer watchdog hat and talk some shop on the blisteringly fast Athlon 800MHz.
The Athlon 750MHz was AMD's first step into the .18-micron die fabrication process and generally a step in the right direction. For the 800, AMD has once again utilized the newer K75 core. There are some advantages to this that trickle down to the consumer. The older K7 core die-size was 188 square millimeters on a .25-micron process as opposed to 102 square millimeters on .18. We say 'trickle down' because, as a result, AMD should be able to cut more Athlon processors per wafer and thus reduce the cost of manufacturing.
