Patrick Moorehead, head of AMD's Customer Advocacy Initiative (CAI), will visit Australia to breif members and guests attending the Australian Information Industry Association's September 12 Spotlight event about the project.
Formalising the goal of AMD's True Performance Initiative announced last October, Robinson said the CAI aims to establish a new industry metric for processor performance. He said the metric would be established through a consortium of industry representatives.
Earlier this year, Moorehead told BBC World Service that AMD had found that customers were confused about the concept that a lower frequency chip could out-perform a higher frequency chip.
Chip market leader Intel will neither discourage or support the initiative, however it's clear that the company sees no reason to seek new performance benchmarks for processors.
"Intel works with industry standard benchmarks and in line with those industry benchmarks, P4 is the leading processor," said a spokesperson for the company.
However, recent events in the United States may boost AMD's campaign to redefine chip performance.
News came to light Monday that a group -- believed to be PC enthusiasts -- has filed a law suit against Intel in the United States over the performance of its Pentium 4 series processors. The group believes that Intel misled the public when marketing the Pentium 4 as superior in performance to the Pentium III and AMD's Athlon.
Robinson said it was natural for AMD to have an interest in the case as it involves the purchase of a processor that doesn't meet the expectations that its clock speed would normally create in the buyer "from a performance point of view".
"We don't have any involvement in this but we certainly agree with that line [of argument] taking place," said Robinson.
Robinson said that it was too early to know whether AMD would participate in the court action. However, he added that the nature of the case might force legal authorities to seek contribution from members of the chip industry.
"If someone's asked to be present in a case they may have to, but I don't really know, I'm not a lawyer" said Robinson.
The debate that Robinson believes may be at the core of the case is one that AMD has been pushing into the public sphere since last October.
The True Performance Initiative was announced jointly alongside the launch of AMD's Athlon XP processor series.
During the launch, it was revealed that the chips would be branded for consumers using a naming convention that de-emphasised the use of megahertz to indicate performance. The Athlon XP's series processors are assigned a number that indicates their performance relative to AMD's Athlon 1400.
The naming scheme diverged markedly from the AMD's practice of making a CPU's name a direct derivative of its clock-cycle rating in megahertz.
At the time the True Performance Initiative and the naming scheme was launched, Intel had stretched its lead over AMD in the production of chips with higher clock-cycle capabilities.
The previous year AMD made great efforts to beat Intel in the race to produce the first consumer-ready 1GHz chip.
This could be history in the making. Imagine that in this precedent that anyone who purchased a pentium 4 could sue for lack of performance. AMD has wallopped Intel as far as bang for your buck goes, thats no secret, but going to court about it is a little excessive.
This may be the time where intel is going to fall on it's big corporate **** This is certainly a large can of worms to open.
And the naming conventions is a strange thing. If intel don't co-operate with changing the CPU names to be relative to performance then who is AMD going to share these new names with? VIA? Cyrix? Like these even could be considered competitors!