AMD's Athlon 64 3400+: Death of the FX-51
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 6, 2004 4:35 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
DirectX 9 Performance – Halo
For the Halo benchmark, we used the PS/VS 2.0 rendering mode (DX9), and ran the timedemo with vsync off at 60Hz.
In Halo we see a similar case of GPU-limited performance even at a "low" 1024x768 resolution, making all of the contenders equal performers.
In addition to an average frames per second value, the Halo timedemo will also output the total number of seconds elapsed during the benchmarking process, which includes the time required to load the levels being benchmarked. The benchmark time thus takes into account overall system performance a bit more so we decided to include those numbers as well:
The only somewhat appreciable difference in performance is seen by the Extreme Edition, but in terms of a tangible performance difference between the CPUs there's not much to look for.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
38 Comments
View All Comments
Jeff7181 - Tuesday, January 6, 2004 - link
I found fault with the article... no FS2004 benchmark. Can I have it please? :DJeff7181 - Tuesday, January 6, 2004 - link
I agree with everyone so far =)But I think AMD may have shot themselves in the foot by releasing the 3400+, which performs exactly the same as the insanely priced FX-51. Unless they have some tricks up their sleeve with socket 939 that will improve performance, why would anyone spend twice the money on the FX-51 when the 3400+ provides 98% of the performance of the FX-51?
Jason Clark - Tuesday, January 6, 2004 - link
The print article issue is fixed.Cheers
AlexWade - Tuesday, January 6, 2004 - link
I liked the compile times benchmark! Please have it all new reviews of CPU's.PrinceXizor - Tuesday, January 6, 2004 - link
Nice review! I especially liked the price/performance charts. It should be interesting to see how AMD handles the transition from 754 to 939 sockets.The thing I find most impressive is that AMD is staying ahead of Intel as far as performance, something many of us did not think possible given Hammer's seemingly endless wait.
Intel had to rush out an EE version to remain competitive while it waited for Prescott (I'm not intel bashing, I'm sure Prescott will compete nicely).
In the meantime, AMD is the one hitting the "3400+" performance arena before the 3.4Ghz Prescotts hit. The question always was, can AMD execute with the Athlon 64 as well as they did with the Athlon XP? The answer seems to be yes. Very well done AMD!
P-X
Insomniac - Tuesday, January 6, 2004 - link
I meant hints. ;)Insomniac - Tuesday, January 6, 2004 - link
Nice article. Any hits on how the battle will look when Prescott hits? :)I noticed in the print view, none of the charts are showing up.
FearoftheNight - Tuesday, January 6, 2004 - link
great review...hope to see socket 939 coverage coming soon :D