Multitasking Scenario 2: File Compression

For our next test, we simulated what would happen if we performed two disk intensive tasks at the same time: zipping a file while importing a 260MB PST file into Outlook 2003. 

We ran the same Firefox and iTunes tasks from the last test again, and then did the following:

1) Open Outlook.
2) Start importing 260MB PST.
3) Start WinRAR.
4) Archive 130MB test file.

WinRAR remained the application in focus during this test.

Here, we looked at two metrics: how long it took WinRAR to compress our test file, and how many emails were imported into Outlook during the time that WinRAR was archiving.  Let's have a look at the results:

Multitasking Performance - Scenario 2

The Pentium D did slightly better than the Athlon 64 in the WinRAR test, but as expected, had well over twice as many emails imported into Outlook by the time that the test was over.  Even the Pentium 4 630 also managed to import significantly more emails than the AMD platform. 

The Impact of NCQ on Multitasking Performance Multitasking Scenario 3: Web Browsing
Comments Locked

106 Comments

View All Comments

  • segagenesis - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    #30 - Excuse me for trying to save money also. Last I checked Intel was still more expensive. Not to mention Extremely Expensive edition.
  • rqle - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    All i know is that i alt-tab / alt-enter to the desktop running general apps all the time while gaming. I bought two system so i can download while gaming on the other system for this very reason. To do both at the same time would cause the ftp software to go into idle state with the fastest download speed at only 8-10kb/s. I can set the ftp software at a higher priority but then it would just cripple my gaming. These dual core look very promising, but ill hold out for amd dual core.
  • GentleStream - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    I'm interested in benchmarks that would be relevant to scientific computing and software development.
    How about benchmarking a parallel compile of some non-trivial software package such as building the
    gcc compiler. That takes quite a long time on my 4 year old laptop.
  • danidentity - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    So when are the Pentium D and the new chipsets being released?

    Spill it Anand. ;)
  • Turnip - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    #23

    What about the fourth option? That by the time AMD's desktop dual core processor is available, Intel will have a new dual core processor available. Now, whether we're talking more than "two cores bunged on a chip", or whether we're simply talking a jacked up FSB (which has, remember, always given Intel a hefty jump in the encoding arena), I don't know. But I do know one thing...

    Intel is a very big company and Intel has very big sleeves. ;)
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    Spearhawk

    Good catch, the graphing engine didn't regenerate those graphs properly. Fixed now.

    Take care,
    Anand
  • Questar - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    I love this, all the AMD fanboys having seizures over that fact that an Intel CPU can actually have some benefits.

    It's been a blast reading all these posts the last two days.
  • Spearhawk - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    He said that a 2.2 GHz dualcore Athlon 64 wouldn't compete with the 2.8 GHz Pentium D at encoding. Notice the encoding part, he said nothing about other stuff.
    I'm guessing one can know that by looking at dual CPU Opteron systems, the dualcore A64 won't beat them, and if they can't beat a 2.8 Pentium D then the dualcore A64 won't be able to either.

    Is there something wrong with the graphs in the DVD Shrink/Game test? The comments doesn't seem to match them (especialy the part about the minimum frame rate being equal)
  • PorBleemo - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    How do you calculate the system wattages like that? I have been attempting to find detailed information on how to do this but have turned up nothing yet.

    Thanks!
  • Illissius - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    #10 - you are quite correct. anyone who games with a processor-intensive background task running at the same time _on a single core processor_ is insane. the reason I wanted to see benchmarks is to see whether dual core changes that.
    theoretically, I don't see why it wouldn't work:
    - you only have one GPU, and only the game is using it
    - you have two processor intensive tasks - the game and the background task, and two cores, one for each
    hence, no conflict. whether that actually holds up in the real world is/was the question (if the background task is multithreaded, or heavily uses reasources other than just the processor, then naturally the above doesn't hold true).

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now