Intel 925X/915: Chipset Performance & DDR2
by Wesley Fink on June 19, 2004 3:01 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
925X vs. 915 vs. Athlon 64: General Performance & Encoding
We see the 915 trailing the 925x by only about 2% to 3%, which is a much smaller performance difference than we saw with a non-PAT 865 compared to a PAT 875. We continue to see the pattern of Intel processors performing better in FutureMark Benchmarks like PCMark2004 and Sysmark 2004, and AMD Athlon 64 performing much better in Veritest Winstones. Since a significant component of PCMark 2004 is hard drive performance, the SATA RAID on the 2 Intel chipsets likely accounts for part of the performance advantage for Intel in this benchmark. Media Encoding in 32-bit has been dominated by Intel, and Intel still enjoys about a 12% performance advantage over AMD's best. However, the arrival of 64-bit encoding for AMD will dramatically change these results in the near future.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
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