Performance Test Configuration
| Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor(s): | AMD Opteron Socket 940 at 2.0GHz (9x222) 444FSB AMD Athlon XP 3200+ (2.2GHz, 400MHz FSB) Intel Dual Xeon 3.06 (1 Mb Cache)* 533FSB Intel Pentium 4 at 3.0GHz (800FSB) |
| RAM: | 4 x 512MB Legacy ECC at 2.5-3-4-5 2 x 512MB Mushkin PC3500 Level II 2 x 256MB Corsair PC3200 TwinX LL (v1.1 or 1.2) Modules (SPD rated) |
| Hard Drive(s): | Maxtor 120GB 7200 RPM (8MB Buffer) Western Digital 120GB 7200 RPM Special Edition (8MB Buffer) |
| Video AGP & IDE Bus Master Drivers: | NVIDIA nForce version 2.45 (7/29/2003) NVIDIA nForce version 2.03 (1/30/03) VIA 4in1 Hyperion 4.47 (May 20, 2003) |
| Video Card(s): | ATI Radeon 9800 PRO 128MB (AGP 8X) |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 3.6 |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP1 |
| Motherboards: | nVidia Reference nForce3 @ 222.0 MHz FSB DFI NFII Ultra LANParty (nForce2 Ultra 400) @ 201.35 MHz FSB Gigabyte 7NNXP (nForce2 Ultra 400) @ 202.77MHz FSB Soltek KT600-R (KT600)@200.01 FSB Asus PC-DL Dual 3.06 Xeon* @200.0 MHz Asus P4C800-E @200.5 MHz ABIT IS7-G (865PE) ABIT IC7-G (875P) Gigabyte 8KNXP (875P) |
| *IMPORTANT: While the Dual Xeon 3.06 Asus PC-DL was included for comparison, please keep in mind that our standard benchmarks are not multi-threading enabled. Results should not be considered a comparison of multi-threading to a single processor. Since the Dual 875 is being targeted at the Gaming and Enthusiast markets, we believe it is fair to include the Dual Xeon 875 in comparisons to other solutions that also target the gaming and enthusiast market. | |
Recent performance tests on Intel 875/865 boards used 2x512MB Mushkin PC3500 Level II Double-bank memory. Previous tests of Intel motherboards used 2x256MB Corsair 3200LL Ver. 1.1.
All performance tests run on nForce2 Ultra 400 motherboards utilized two 256MB Corsair TwinX LL PC3200 (v1.1 or 1.2) modules set to SPD timings in Dual-Channel DDR400 mode.
All performance tests that ran on the KT600-based motherboard used two 256MB Corsair TwinX LL PC3200 (v1.1 or 1.2) Corsair modules in DDR400 mode. 4-bank interleave and the highest available timing option (Turbo or Ultra) was used.
All performance tests were run with the ATI 9800 PRO 128MB video card with AGP Aperture set to 128MB with Fast Write enabled. Resolution in all benchmarks is 1024x768x32.
Additions to Performance Tests
We have standardized on ZD Labs Internet Content Creation Winstone 2003 and ZD Labs Business Winstone 2002 for system benchmarking.Game Benchmarks
We have added Gun Metal DirectX Benchmark 2 from Yeti Labs as a standard game benchmark. We are also evaluating the new X2 Benchmark, which includes Transform and Lighting effects as part of the standard benchmark. Results are reported here for reference.Jedi Knight II has been dropped form our standard Benchmark Suite. We were forced to use different patches for operation on Athlon and Intel Pentium 4, which made cross-platform comparison difficult, if not impossible. In addition, Opteron/Athlon64 requires a third patching variation for benchmarking. JK2 uses a Quake engine, and we are continuing Quake3 as a standard benchmark for the time being.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
79 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
Oh little Dvinnen I petty you for your ignoranceAMD Opteron Socket 940 at 2.0GHz (9x222) 444FSB
The opteron has the equivalent to a MEM-controller between MEM and CPU. And it is quote running at "AMD Opteron Socket 940 at 2.0GHz (9x222) 444FSB". So be that the mem will run at 444 Mhz or 222 "Dobbel-pumped" Mhz
So even the anandtech 'beeps' don't know the architecture of the CPU... Although FSB is a wrong id of it.
Mvh Mjello
The fool is not the one who is deceived. But the one who wants to be deceived...
By the way. The hypertransport-link is for peripherals.. Not memory
Not that I really care enough to answer you little dwuuip but I am in a rare mood
Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
one more (hopefully constructive) suggestion - how about commentary on the benchmarks next to the appropriate graphs so we can see the #'s while we read the comments.Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
quick suggestion for you guys - how come the graphs are labeled with motherboard names? shouldn't they be labeled with CPU names since this is a CPU comparison. Just skimming the article and looking at the graphs I had no idea what was being compared. If need be, put the chipset in parenthesis next to the CPU name & speed.excellent article though! athlon64 looks very imrpessive
Icewind - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
Wow, so far AMD looks like there on the right track, but its going to be interesting to see how Intel fires back at that with Prescott and Tejas, not to mention the change to PCI Express and what not. Next year is gonna be insane thats for sure. For now, im enjoying my 2.8.@3.2 ASUS P4C800-E, 1 Gig corsair rig and its screams. Im in looking into a 9800pro or 9800XT for my video card and im set for a good long year.sprockkets - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
Yeah, fire hazard, that's why a 3.2P4 uses 82w of power just to sit there, and the 3200+ XP uses 62.Dell won't touch AMD due to Intel forcing them to.
Intel has billions to spend on R&D, and look where it's gotten them, the loser Itanium.
And with P4 clock speeds like a 140mhz would make the world of difference on the 54% it is behind.
Why use 4x512MB? Don't we all need 2Gb of ram to function best?
You're right, due to the P4 freq binge AMD did introduce its + ratings. Isn't amazing that a processor running slower memory and 1060 mhz less can still be faster?
Funny, 20 out of 20 of my AMD systems don't have quirks in them, must be a stupid Windows user.
dvinnen - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
<<<and with 22 Mhz OC to the memory.>>>Wow. Did you even read the artical or know anything about The K8 line? There is no FSB to oc so you can't oc the memory that way. It gets it's external clock (aka:fsb) from the hypertransport line. So they oced the hypertransport to get the speed from there 1.8 opteron to 2.0, the shiping shipped of A64. OCing the fsb on K8 dosen't do anyithing but increase the clock becuase the HT line is about as saturated as a AGPx8 line.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
#20A lot of pepole play games on Linux, Q3 on Linux is actually a bit faster on my system then in w2k.
But that's not the point. The point is to see how much there is to gain from having a 64bit OS vs. 32bit. I bet id will compile, and release, a 64bit Q3 client for linux sometimes soon. Hope there will be one for UT2003 too.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
A sad day I must say.Not because AMD beat Intel's best (3.2 Ghz)but because AMD only beat intels second best (3.0 Ghz)and with 22 Mhz OC to the memory.
Anandtech is no more than a marketing machine. It's not worthy of our attention.
It is a biased benchmark which twists reality in order to make AMD 64 look better.
Now I must say that I would like this to be a total succes for AMD however I don't like being lied to. And that's what anandtech and AMD is doing in this review. It looks as if AMD is in to deep and might just go under because of their financial problems.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
Why not use 4x512MB memory for the P4 setup, since Anandtech's own setups have shown its best, and also, why a 3200+ Barton and 3.0GHz P4, that's not an equal comparison.Also, the layout seemed awful, there was a page just before the end with about 1/3 a page of text.
And it did seem like there was a lot os ass kissin gin the article as well.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
24/26/27...So many lies out of your mouth.