925X vs. 915 vs. Athlon 64: Test Configuration

The Intel 925X and 915 were configured using the same top-end 560 (3.6GHz) CPU, 1 GB DDR2 memory, video card, hard drives, and SATA RAID Array to compare chipset performance accurately.

 Performance Test Configuration
Processor(s): Intel 560 (3.6GHz) Socket 775
AMD FX53 (2.4GHz) Socket 939
RAM: 2 x 512MB Micron DDR2 533
2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev.2
(Samsung 2-2-2-5 tested at 2-2-2-10 for A64)
Hard Drive(s): 2 x 250GB Maxtor MaXLine III in SATA RAID
Seagate 120GB 7200RPM SATA (8Mb buffer)
Video AGP & IDE Chipset Drivers: Intel Chipset Driver 6.0.0.1014
Intel Application Accelerator 4.0.0.6211

NVIDIA nForce version 4.24
Video Card(s): nVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra PCIe
nVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra AGP 8X
Video Drivers: nVidia 61.45 Graphics Drivers
Operating System(s): Windows XP Professional SP1
Power Supply: HiPro 470W (Intel)
Enermax 465W
Motherboards: Intel 925XCV (Intel 925X) Socket 775
Intel 915GUX (Intel 915G) Socket 775

MSI K8N Neo2 (nForce3-250 Ultra) Socket 939

The AMD Athlon 64 Platform used the top-end FX53 (2.4GHz) CPU, an AGP 8X version of the same GeForce 6800 Ultra video card, 1 GB OCZ DDR400 2-2-2 DDR memory (tested at 2-2-2-10 for best A64 performance) using the new Samsung chips, and (due to time limitations) a single hard drive instead of a RAID array. Using a single drive instead of SATA RAID should place the FX53 system at a performance disadvantage.

The nVidia 6800 Ultra PCIe uses a bridge chip to the PCI Express bus. The performance impact of the nVidia 6800 Ultra bridge chip for PCIe is unknown at this point.

Performance Test Design 925X vs. 915 vs. Athlon 64: General Performance & Encoding
Comments Locked

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

    zzzzzz
  • mkruer - 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

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now