Performance Test Configuration
| Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor(s): | AMD Opteron Socket 940 at 2.0GHz (9x222) 444FSB AMD Athlon XP 3200+ (2.2GHz, 400MHz FSB) Intel Dual Xeon 3.06 (1 Mb Cache)* 533FSB Intel Pentium 4 at 3.0GHz (800FSB) |
| RAM: | 4 x 512MB Legacy ECC at 2.5-3-4-5 2 x 512MB Mushkin PC3500 Level II 2 x 256MB Corsair PC3200 TwinX LL (v1.1 or 1.2) Modules (SPD rated) |
| Hard Drive(s): | Maxtor 120GB 7200 RPM (8MB Buffer) Western Digital 120GB 7200 RPM Special Edition (8MB Buffer) |
| Video AGP & IDE Bus Master Drivers: | NVIDIA nForce version 2.45 (7/29/2003) NVIDIA nForce version 2.03 (1/30/03) VIA 4in1 Hyperion 4.47 (May 20, 2003) |
| Video Card(s): | ATI Radeon 9800 PRO 128MB (AGP 8X) |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 3.6 |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP1 |
| Motherboards: | nVidia Reference nForce3 @ 222.0 MHz FSB DFI NFII Ultra LANParty (nForce2 Ultra 400) @ 201.35 MHz FSB Gigabyte 7NNXP (nForce2 Ultra 400) @ 202.77MHz FSB Soltek KT600-R (KT600)@200.01 FSB Asus PC-DL Dual 3.06 Xeon* @200.0 MHz Asus P4C800-E @200.5 MHz ABIT IS7-G (865PE) ABIT IC7-G (875P) Gigabyte 8KNXP (875P) |
| *IMPORTANT: While the Dual Xeon 3.06 Asus PC-DL was included for comparison, please keep in mind that our standard benchmarks are not multi-threading enabled. Results should not be considered a comparison of multi-threading to a single processor. Since the Dual 875 is being targeted at the Gaming and Enthusiast markets, we believe it is fair to include the Dual Xeon 875 in comparisons to other solutions that also target the gaming and enthusiast market. | |
Recent performance tests on Intel 875/865 boards used 2x512MB Mushkin PC3500 Level II Double-bank memory. Previous tests of Intel motherboards used 2x256MB Corsair 3200LL Ver. 1.1.
All performance tests run on nForce2 Ultra 400 motherboards utilized two 256MB Corsair TwinX LL PC3200 (v1.1 or 1.2) modules set to SPD timings in Dual-Channel DDR400 mode.
All performance tests that ran on the KT600-based motherboard used two 256MB Corsair TwinX LL PC3200 (v1.1 or 1.2) Corsair modules in DDR400 mode. 4-bank interleave and the highest available timing option (Turbo or Ultra) was used.
All performance tests were run with the ATI 9800 PRO 128MB video card with AGP Aperture set to 128MB with Fast Write enabled. Resolution in all benchmarks is 1024x768x32.
Additions to Performance Tests
We have standardized on ZD Labs Internet Content Creation Winstone 2003 and ZD Labs Business Winstone 2002 for system benchmarking.Game Benchmarks
We have added Gun Metal DirectX Benchmark 2 from Yeti Labs as a standard game benchmark. We are also evaluating the new X2 Benchmark, which includes Transform and Lighting effects as part of the standard benchmark. Results are reported here for reference.Jedi Knight II has been dropped form our standard Benchmark Suite. We were forced to use different patches for operation on Athlon and Intel Pentium 4, which made cross-platform comparison difficult, if not impossible. In addition, Opteron/Athlon64 requires a third patching variation for benchmarking. JK2 uses a Quake engine, and we are continuing Quake3 as a standard benchmark for the time being.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
79 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
Not to worry, there will soon be more competition for Opteron in the form of Low Voltage (and price) Itaniums, Prescotts, and even 800 MHz FSB Nocona XEONs. It's going to be very fun in the next year or so.Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
Am I the only one concerned that each test platform seems to use different amounts of system memory?Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
1 OF 2 things will have to happen. Either MS reduces their prices to compete with Linux or Linux will start charging/more for their OS. Open source is great and cheap right now which is why it is popular, but someone will try to commercialize it.Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link
Fortunately in the next few years many folks will be switching to Linux both 32 and 64-bit just to get away from Windoze and all the stability and security issues with virtually every version of Windoze, bar none. This will be good news for AMD and the Opteron/A64 which both run very well on Linux and 64-bit Linux is available to all right now.Once the software companies wake up and smell the coffee and pull their heads out of Microsofts's butthole, they'll start releasing apps for Linux that look and feel like those for Windoze. This will facilitate a relatively painless transition for millions of folks who would switch to Linux immediately if they could import all of their existing apps files without headaches. Thankfully with enterprise and World governments switching to Linux, there is a clear financial incentive for software makers to get their act together and fill customer needs. The World will be a much better place when consumers have the ability to purchase a quality O/S and software apps and at this stage of the game Linux is a clear winner over any Windoze O/S for stability, performance and security.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
Well when the P4 first came out it was slower than the P3, and costed around $1200-1500. You expect a new series processor to be dirt cheap? Yeah right.Prescott is what, a P4 with 20w more heat dissapation and 1MB cache and several (currently) useless instructions? OK, it has some other secret features. How long though can the 2x ALU stay 2x? They will run at 6.8ghz, and getting them to work at higher speeds will be 2x as hard as the rest of the processor (and it's now supposively going to be 4x?).
Of course, I guess everyone forgot, this is just a preview, not the acutal thing, so why get so worked up over it?.
Whether the desktop version is great or not, the more Opterons you run together only get better, with the Xeon you get less in return from going 2 to 4.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
What is the reason that overclocked Opteron 244 is used instead of the real Opteron 246 that is available in retail? What is the reason to use 2 Gig of memory and compare it to a system that uses 512 MB memory? If memory doesn't matter in those bechmarks then why 2x256 isn't used?Why not to compare to Pentium 3.2 which is the top Intel desktop chip instead of 3.0 GHz?
Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
Why on earth are the benchmark results in FLASH?Thats just really annoying.
Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
This benchmark is pretty funny, it leaves a lot to be desired from todays reviewers. Not that I think the athlon64 isn't a very good improvement, but the results they are showing do not match any other results people have seen, reminds me of the Hardocp reviews.Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
Just for your information number 49, the 2.0GHz CPU anandtech tested won't be the fastest CPU AMD releases on the 23rd, so comparing it to a 3.2GHz CPU would actually have been unfair.Anonymous User - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
That's not anand hahahah :p