Windows XP 64-Bit Preview: First Look at Athlon 64 Performance
by Wesley Fink on February 7, 2004 12:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Systems
System and Memory Benchmarks
SiSoft Sandra 2004 64-Bit
The 64-bit
version of Sandra 2004 has been available for a while, but we did not have an Operating System to reliably run with the 64-bit version. Sandra 64-bit runs fine on the XP64 preview.
While Sandra is a Synthetic Benchmark, we were curious to see if there
would be any performance difference in memory, CPU Arithmetic, and Multimedia
benchmarks between the 32-bit and 64-bit versions. Everything was kept the same; we even used
nVidia drivers close to the same version number. The only difference is Sandra 2004 tests were
run on XP Pro, while Sandra 2004 64-bit tests were run on XP 64-bit Preview
Edition.
|
SiSoft Sandra 2004 - Athlon 64 FX51 Performance |
|||
|
|
32-Bit (Windows XP SP1) |
64-Bit (XP64 Preview Edition) |
% Change 32 to 64-bit |
|
Sandra 2004 Standard Buffered |
INT
5722 FLT 5660 |
INT
5910 FLT 5831 |
+3.2% |
|
Sandra 2004 UNBuffered |
INT
2588 FLT
2682 |
INT
2811 FLT
2791 |
+6.3% |
|
Sandra 2004 CPU Arithmetic |
9161 mips 3470/4534 mflops |
10121 mips 3881/4105 mflops |
+10.5% mips -0.2% mflops |
|
Sandra 2004 CPU Multimedia |
INT 16404 FLOAT 21642 |
INT 16598 FLOAT 22869 |
+1% INT +5.7% FLOAT |
The 32-bit
vs. 64-bit results in Sandra are very interesting. Even in this pre-release version of XP64, the
Athlon 64 CPU and Memory Performance is higher than in 32-bit Windows XP. Mips, which is based on ALU tests, is more
than 10% faster, and Integer and Float tests in the Sandra 2004 Multimedia
benchmark is 1% to 6% faster. The only
area without increased performance in 64-bit is the mflops component of the
Arithmetic benchmark. If we look closer,
this benchmark is a combination FPU performance and iSSE2 performance. While Floating Point increases some 11.6% in
the move from XP to XP64 Preview, the Intel SSE2 results decrease by about the
same amount. The net result is
virtually no change in the composite mflops.
We do not know if this is because Intel SSE2 is penalized by 64-bit
operation or whether XP64 and/or Sandra 2004 64-bit benchmark require some
optimizations for 64-bit performance.
Super Pi
Super PI is
very simple - it calculates the value of pi.
In the benchmark you can select the number of placed for calculation,
and we used 2 million places as used in memory tests at AnandTech.
|
Super Pi - Athlon 64 FX51
Performance |
|||
|
|
32-Bit (Windows XP SP1) |
64-Bit (XP64 Preview Edition) |
% Change 32 to 64-bit |
|
Super Pi 2M Places |
88 seconds |
88 seconds |
0% |
As you can
see, Super Pi was exactly the same result in both 32 and 64-bit.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
42 Comments
View All Comments
Pumpkinierre - Monday, February 9, 2004 - link
#30 they used an nvidia5950 with a released (but maybe not mature) 64bit driver for the tests. I suggested using 32bit drivers (#17) to see if the core of the OS was the problem but INTC(#18) kindly referred me to a post that shows that once the 32bit code goes into the WOW dlls its 64bit thereafter. So its difficult to isolate the problem, one way, as one post suggested, is lower the resolution and take the workload of the graphics card and perhaps use older games that are less video card dependent. If the difference between XP and Win64 result does'nt narrow with these settings then it is the OS core/WOW that is more likely at fault. From the large discrepancy in the older games Quake3 and Comanche4 results, I suspect it is not just the drivers at fault.The Lost Circuits post (#18) also indicated that Win64 handled 16bit apps. as well Sniper #28 but probably via a different module.
vedin - Sunday, February 8, 2004 - link
Sniper, you have to take into account the fact that that was, unless I'm wrong, an almost generic Microsoft ATI driver, and NOT a 64bit driver from ATI...seeing as ATI has no such driver. Neither did the chipset maker for that matter, so the AGP "Bus" would lag a bit too. Heck, I'm surprised any of the games worked AT ALL. I expect to see no less than a 30% performance boost on ATI's first released 64bit driver, and I think it will actually BE in the neighboorhood of the exact defficit that we see now. After the second or third revision, I expect the games to get on average of 5-20% faster than they would with the newest 32bit drivers on 32bit Windows.Can you say, preview, beta copy?
dvinnen - Sunday, February 8, 2004 - link
It's not emulation. All they did was add another layer for 32 bit code. While this will hender proformance, current code ges through so many layers as it is, it won't be that noticable. Certanly would not hender proformance to the tune of 50%Sniper342 - Sunday, February 8, 2004 - link
I think this article is promoting some misconceptions...When running 32 bit applications, like pretty much all current games, on the 64 bit edition of Windows XP, the 32 bit games will be running through a seperate subsystem, sort of like an emulation or compatability mode type thing. So that's probably why the games are running slower...
The conclusion in this article regarding 64 bit gaming performance seems false, and the test doesn't seem very logical. To know the 64 bit gaming performance, a 64 bit build of THE GAME must be tested... The 64 bit operating system was only able to run the current games due to the compatability emulation-ish mode, so of course it's usually slower...
Read Microst's FAQ for Windows XP 64 Bit edition:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/evaluatio...
"Q. Will my applications be faster on Windows XP 64-Bit Edition?"
"Most 32-bit applications should continue to perform best on 32-bit versions of the Windows operating system."
"Q. Will Windows XP 64-Bit Edition support 32-bit applications?
A. A key feature of Windows XP 64-Bit Edition is its ability to run 32-bit Windows-based applications unmodified on the 64-bit platform. To enable this capability, Microsoft has added a new 32-bit subsystem to Windows XP 64-Bit Edition. This subsystem—Windows on Windows 64—provides the 32-bit Windows services needed for applications to run properly even if they are not 64-bit. (Note: This subsystem does not support 16-bit applications.)"
Wesley Fink - Sunday, February 8, 2004 - link
DivXNetworks is a launch parther of AMD and the official site for Divx. They claim the 64-bit version of Dr. Divx leaves everything avaible in the dust. As soon as Dr. Divx 64 is released we will be publishing benchmarks.AMD included coupons for Dr. Divx 64 in the retail version of Athlon64 FX processors.
Visual - Sunday, February 8, 2004 - link
---- Wesley Fink wrote ----XP64 uses DirectX 64 and a Direct X 32-bit version. We were told there may be a problem with enabling DirectX 64 in this Preview Edition. We did run DXDiag for 64-bits and checked to make sure DX64 was enabled.
----
well, i'd imagine that the 32bit apps use the 32bit directx anyway, so it doesnt matter if 64bit directx is enabled.
you know what i think you should add to this article? i'd be curious to see SiSoft Sandra 2004 32bit version on the 64bit windows. that way we can get numbers for "Change 32bit to 64bit OS only" and "Change 32bit app to 64bit app".
wow if that divx thing gets even better with 64bit app & codec then AMD be kings of the world!
the article is good news, i like it!
sipc660 - Saturday, February 7, 2004 - link
i'll save my money for a nice gigabyte mobo based on sis 756 and pci express 16x radeon (R423)of coarse some DDR2(if supported)
by then (probably mid 2004) xp64 should be mature as well as drivers.
then i'll ask these cocks if they still don't beleive the gaming power of 64 bit could not improve.
remember
they don't kill the rooster because he sings, but because he sings at the wrong time LOL
so be "as sabirun"= means patient.
wait and we will wait with you.....
go amd
michael3333 - Saturday, February 7, 2004 - link
Also, the Microsoft site specifically stated that this Windows will ONLY work on an Opteron/AMD64 based processor system. No mention of anything Intel. If this Windows will work on Intel Xeon CT than Intel will have to used licensed AMD 64 technology right? LOLmichael3333 - Saturday, February 7, 2004 - link
drivers, drivers, drivers. 16 registers. AMD64 can run 32 bit inside 64bit but those 16 registers is what will speed things up. How does anyone say Prescott looks good based on a crappy driver run Preview version of a 64bit windoze using almost all 32bit tests? UH oktantryl - Saturday, February 7, 2004 - link
Is it just me, or does it seem strange testing out the capabilities of a 64-bit processor and OS with 32 bit application benchmarks?