Intel 925X/915: Chipset Performance & DDR2
by Wesley Fink on June 19, 2004 3:01 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Performance Test Design
With so many changes in the Intel desktop, there were a lot of burning questions to be answered. It seemed a little inadequate just to run a few benchmarks on the new chipsets, or quote performance figures supplied by Intel, so we tried to devise some comparisons that would answer the most common questions that we have heard regarding the new Intel architecture.1. How do the 925X and 915 compare in performance? Is there a significant performance difference in the new chipsets? How does the top Intel system compare to a top AMD Athlon 64 System? 925X and 915 systems were identically configured with Intel 560 processors (3.6GHz) and performance compared with a full set of motherboard benchmarks. We included benchmarks using Dual-Channel DDR memory and the same video card in an AGP 8X flavor on an AMD Athlon 64 FX53 system for comparison. These tests begin on Page 8.
2. How does Intel's new top 925X with PCIe, DDR2, and SATA Matrix RAID compare in performance to a similarly equipped top 875P system? We compared performance of a top 875 with a 3.2 Northwood, GeForce 6800 Ultra AGP 8X, SATA RAID, and DDR 2-2-2-5 memory to the Intel 925X with a 3.2E (775) Prescott, GeForce 6800 Ultra PCIe, SATA Matrix RAID, and DDR2 memory. These tests begin on Page 12.
3. Is DDR2 really faster than DDR? We verified there was no memory performance degradation of the Gigabyte Dual-Memory board compared to Intel 915. Performance with DDR and DDR2 were then compared on the Gigabyte over our motherboard test suite. These tests begin on Page 16.
57 Comments
View All Comments
Neekotin - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
guess i'll be keeping my system for another 1 year.. hehehe ;). just gonna buy me a new GPU!Degrador - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
Well this has just confirmed my plan for an athlon 64 next - I can't see any reason to be looking towards intel, either now or in the near future (next 6 months).WileCoyote - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
baby steps...mkruer - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
Actually now that I think of Intel might be correct. The chipset may be up to 15% faster, its just that Prescott is up to 15% slower.wicktron - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
zzzzzzmkruer - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
The moral of this story, buy AMD instead.Falloutboy525 - Saturday, June 19, 2004 - link
now it makes sence as to why amd isn't even bothering wth ddr2 till it speeds up