... Uh, they use that naming scheme for a good reason. The clock speed is slower, but the performance is better.
The only reason that they need to resort to this is because consumers are brainwashed to think more MHz -> more speed.
Let's take
Scriptkeeper for example. It's powered by two Sparc chips running at 50 MHz. It has the equiv power of a P150 or so. It is "slower", yet faster.
I fail to see how this correlates to quality...
I've used and owned both Cyrix and AMD systems in the past, and my next machine will probably be based around an AMD. I have not seen any evidence that either of the alternatives was lower quality.
In my experience, it's the quality of the motherboard and memory that matter more than the processor.
