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 - Thursday, September 4, 2003 - link
I thought that the Athlon64 did not have the integrated memory controller. That's the big difference between the Opteron and the Atlon64, in single processor quantities.Wesley Fink - Thursday, September 4, 2003 - link
The latest runors at the Inquirer and Xbit Labs have the Athlon64 FX launching at 2.2GHz, which seems to be the rumor consensus :-) I have an Asus SK8N board I am testing now with an Opteron, and it supports both ECC and non-ECC memory - but it appears it MUST be fed Registered memory. This means regular unbuffered memory will not likely work on the Opteron based CPU's.Anonymous User - Thursday, September 4, 2003 - link
Interesting. And isnt the Athlon64 FX supposed to be running at 2.3 ghz? Add in support for Non ECC memory (which is slower) and color me interested.And here I was all set on buying a new 3.0ghz P4 system in a couple of weeks... <sigh>
WheelsCSM - Thursday, September 4, 2003 - link
Looks pretty good, how much are these things supposed to cost?sandorski - Thursday, September 4, 2003 - link
Sounds good! Hopefully the Athlon 64 *will* perform in a similar manner.Anonymous User - Thursday, September 4, 2003 - link
Oh, nevermind. Disregard #3. I understand what you're saying now.Anonymous User - Thursday, September 4, 2003 - link
"Our reference board includes full support for Dual-Channel DDR ECC memory, and the Athlon64 version will also support non-ECC memory"When it says "Athlon64" here is it referring to Athlon64 FX (Socket 940)? I thought that Athlon64 FX is basically an Opteron. And Opteron requires registered DIMMs with ECC.
Anonymous User - Thursday, September 4, 2003 - link
Awesome preview Wes, i can't wait to get one of these bad boys to play with after the 23rd, hopefully in the prommie!!keep up the good work.
Tony
(bigtoe)
AgaBooga - Thursday, September 4, 2003 - link
I wonder when Intel will respond to these articles on Athlon 64 with some Prescott previews