The Stock and Overclock Tests
To make our performance data as useful as possible, we decided to run the stock 4200+ and the overclocked CPU through our standard motherboard test suite. As Anand has already shown in the launch article for AMD Dual-Core these are not the most revealing tests you can run on dual core. However, the test suite is a fair representation of the types of applications you run today, and it is a set of benchmarks that are very familiar to regular readers. This makes it a revealing set of tests for dual-core and overclocked dual-core performance.Performance tests were run at stock speed with the 4200+ and at the highest stable overclocked speed that could be achieved with basic air cooling on our test bed. For comparison the same suite of benchmarks were run using the single core 4000+ CPU. In looking at comparisons in the graphs, keep in mind that the 4000+ runs at 2.4GHz versus 2.2GHz for the 4200+. The 4000+ also features 1MB L2 cache compared to 512KB cache on each core in the 4200+.
The test configuration is our most recent DDR memory test bed built around the DFI LANParty nF4.
| Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor(s) | AMD Athlon64 x2 4200+ (2.2GHz 512KB cache each) 939 AMD Athlon64 4000+ (2.4GHz 1MB Cache) Socket 939 |
| RAM | 2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev. 2 |
| Power Supply | OCZ 520 watt PowerStream |
| CPU Cooling | Thermaltake Silent Boost K8 HeatSink/Fan |
| Hard Drive | Seagate 120GB 7200 RPM SATA (8MB Buffer) |
| Video AGP & IDE Bus Master Drivers | nVidia nForce 6.39 |
| Video Card | nVidia 6800 Ultra (PCIe) |
| Video Driver | nVidia nForce 71.89 |
| Operating System | Windows XP Professional SP2; Direct X 9.0c |
| Motherboard | DFI LANParty nF4 SLI-DR |
For CPU cooling we used the same Thermaltake Silent Boost K8 HSF fan we have used for recent overclocking tests in motherboard reviews. In looking at our overclock numbers, keep in mind that cooling is just a decent stock Heatsink/Fan. Higher overclock will be achieved with more aggressive cooling like liquid cooling or phase-change.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
53 Comments
View All Comments
cryptonomicon - Friday, June 24, 2005 - link
#42 you are a moron. if their 4200 was really cherry picked, they would have it at 3ghz on air. i think this is valid. 2.6-2.7ghz is average ground on the DFI board with 90nm proc, and i see overclocking results every day. its not extordinary.end of story
DavidHull - Friday, June 24, 2005 - link
This article is crap. As long as Anandtech uses cherry-picked processors directly from the manufacturer, it is no more than hired advertising. What happened to journalistic integrity? Do you think that AMD is going to send you a randomly picked processor from the line? How about you test my processor that I bought from a retailer and they we'll talk about how good XX CPU really is.phaxmohdem - Friday, June 24, 2005 - link
#38, I was kind of pissed about that myself, however I have to wonder, lots of times the prices chip manufacturers quote, are for retailers at a quantity of 1000 chips or more. Perhaps that is why? OR perhaps too many geeks spooged prematurely and are willing to shell out extra cash on inflated prices for new and top of the line shiznat. Who knows. All I know is I"m stuck on socket 940 for a while :(Klaasman - Friday, June 24, 2005 - link
I have tested Battlefield2 with 1 gig of ram and 2 gig of ram. With 1 gig, it uses about 675mb. With 2 gig, it uses about 750mb. And still has 725mb in swap. It should use more but don't for some reason.miketheidiot - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
i agree with #17, rome: total war definately needs to be added to the game benchmarks, especailly for CPU tests. I'm not sure if its ram or processor limited, but it easily brings my 2.55ghz winchester and 1gig of ram to its knees in some of the larger battles.yacoub - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
Btw I like how the AMD chart shows the 4200+ sold at around $530 but if you check the RTPE, the cheapest is $575 plus shipping. =PSilthDraeth - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
I believe Val brings up interesting points. I would like to see benchmarks of identicly systems, except for the amount of RAM. This would prove if his perceptions have merit. I believe they do, but I do not have any benchmarks to prove it.Gatak - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
#35You are right that overclocking is highly random. All chips are made with lots of things in mind. For example different target models, performance, and not to forget minimum life expectancy.
If you overclock and stress the components you _WILL_ reduce the lifetime. Also, things like temperature also affect both achievable performance and lifetime. If you increase the temperature by 10c you would reduce the life expectancy by half!
The amount you can overclock is usually the margin you have against lifetime and stability.
fishbits - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
"We have asked AMD for a 4400+ and 4800+ for comparison"OK, non-overclocker questions about that: My understanding that the overclocking of a chip can vary from production run to production run, and even individual CPU to individual CPU. So wouldn't any CPU (or GPU etc) manufacturer test some of their CPUs and set aside a box full of the best overclockers to be sent to review sites, to give the impression that that's what the average one can achieve? I guess this kind of arrangement is a necessity though so that you have a sample in a timely fashion.
Granted in the real world there's money concerns, availability concerns, etc. But wouldn't it theoretically be better to buy a random one from a random vendor who doesn't know it's going to reviewers? If it is an issue in any way in OC situations, maybe it's worth noting early on that the sample was provided to the staff by the manufacturer, but then again perhaps that should go without saying.
val - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
***75-80 percent of available main...****