2.8E vs 2.8C: DirectX 8/Open GL Gaming Performance


Gaming Performance - 2.8E vs 2.8C

Gaming Performance - 2.8E vs 2.8C

Gaming Performance - 2.8E vs 2.8C

Gaming Performance - 2.8E vs 2.8C

Gaming Performance - 2.8E vs 2.8C

Gaming Performance - 2.8E vs 2.8C

After our disappointing results with Prescott in earlier testing, we were extremely skeptical about ATI's claim that RS350 performed best with Prescott. You can see for yourself that ATI wasn't kidding. Across the board in OpenGL games like Quake 3 and DirectX 8 games like X2, Comanche 4, and Unreal Tournament 2003, Prescott is the faster processor on the ATI chipset.

While the results are clear enough - 875 is faster with Northwood and RS350 is fastest with Prescott - we were frankly surprised that tweaking for Prescott could make this much difference in performance. Prescott on the RS350 is at least the equal of Northwood, and most times it is faster. The 875 shows the exact reverse of this pattern.

Certainly, the larger implications are that we can expect chipsets designed primarily to work with Prescott to perform better compared to Northwood than current Intel platform chipsets.

Performance Test Configuration: 2.8E vs 2.8C 2.8E vs 2.8C: DirectX 9 Gaming Performance
Comments Locked

24 Comments

View All Comments

  • Cygni - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    "Who that comes to this site give a flying f*ck about integrated graphics"

    "where are the x800 bencharks?? that's what we care about."

    "Stop with these goddamn AT sponsor suckup/teaser "ref board" reviews."

    First, where the heck did all of these MUTANTS come from? This is AT. Not eXtremeTechOmgFPSAWesome.org.

    Second, x800 is under NDA until its launched, for the love of god. Anandtech CANT say anything about it.

    Third, LOTS of Anandtech users care about Integrated Graphics. ALOT of the people who come to Anandtech system build for money/pleasure. Just go to the Forums and find out. This is an IT Tech site, NOT a "Gamers Only" site. Hence the server storys, etc.

    Finally, I for one enjoy the fact that Anandtech tests boards that most other sites dont have BEFORE they are on the shelf. Anandtech ALSO tests AFTER they are on the shelf to compare. Why WOULDNT they test the board they get sent, to let everyone know? And I like the way you imply that AnandTech only gets pre-release boards because they are sponsored by the company and want a favorable review. You certainly havent been coming here long if you think that.
  • Myrandex - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    also, what is up with the constant testing of bank interleave set to disabled, doesn't it help memory performance?
  • Myrandex - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    allisolm good job on the empty post. But otherwise, in the article, it is stated that the chipset just supports SATA ports, but in the chipset diagram, it shows RAID 0 and 1 supported. Any clue as to which is right? Also, it is always good to see integrated graphics performance, especially for the reason that many moderately proced laptop haves integrated graphics (not my A64 rad 9600, but still), and it is good to see them approach playable levels.
    Jason
  • Pumpkinierre - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    Its hard ro understand how you can 'optimise' for a different x86 cpu (nf3 and nVidia Gpus optimisation is a different story) unless they are taking advantage of some of the extra 'secret' X86-64 registers on the Prescott.

  • Bozo Galora - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link


    Stop with these goddamn AT sponsor suckup/teaser "ref board" reviews.
    If it aint final - dont look at it.
    All this crap is obsolete now anyway in just a few months.
    Give me a break.
    Talk about a white elephant.
  • AtaStrumf - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    It was your imagination! It's supposed to come out tomorrow May 4th or on Wednesday May 5th.

    As for IGP tests: Why the hell not test them? If you dont like it just skip it bitch! I know I was quite interested in the results and I'm sure so were many others.

    Nice to see ATi finaly come out with a good chipset (cross your fingers for OC-ing being as good as they say), so that the two GPU giants have now fairly devided the two top CPU manufacturers.
  • araczynski - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    All i'm saying is it must be a slow day in the news department :)

    i understand the interest, which i have as well, but in all honesty, anyone concerned about playing games, won't get a system with an IG, and anyone that does, will be disappointed no matter what IG is in there. Whether they get 19FPS or 21FPS, they're not going to be happy.

    anyway, where's the x800 stuff? wasn't that supposed to come out first of may? or was that my imagination again.
  • DAPUNISHER - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    There's a typo on the IGP test config page, it states ATi 865G where it should read Intel.

    BTW, I'm always very interested in IGP reviews as white box builder a good 80% of my biz is budget IGP systems.

    IMHO though, IGP with a $150+ CPU does not equate budget and Celerons won't find a place in my builds unless intel decides to make them more competitive in the sub $100 market vs AMD.

    Now, the last thing to answer is wether ATi finally got the overclocking right ;)
  • allisolm - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

  • NullSubroutine - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    Unlike all these other guys, I do care about Intergrated Graphics...not because I own one (I got A64), but because many people do. Most everyday people buy systems from OEMs like Dell, who sell alot of systems with IGs.

    Alot of first time users buy systems that are cheap, and sometimes suck. It is nice to see that if someone wants to build a cheap system they can still play any older DX7 games at reasonably high fps and newer DX8.1/9 games at playable 640x480.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now