General Performance


General Usage Performance

Content Creation Performance

Because of the real world performance measured by the Winstone benchmarks, we did not really expect any difference between 90nm and 130nm results. However, the 90nm processors perform a bit faster than 130nm at the same speed in Business Winstone and Mutlimedia Content Creation Winstone. The differences are very small, but this is the beginning of even larger performance differences in Gaming benchmarks.

It is interesting that a 45% increase in clock speed (1.8GHz to 2.6GHz) on the 3000+ yields a 33% increase in Content Creation scores, but just 24% in Business Winstone. This is just another example showing that multimedia is much more impacted by CPU speed than standard Business applications.

Overclocking Results and Heat Gaming Performance
Comments Locked

89 Comments

View All Comments

  • athlon2004 - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link

    Err.....i'm really a noob....didn't see my post so i thought that there was a problem, but apparently it doesn't reload page 4, but page one. Feel free to delete the other responses.
  • athlon2004 - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link

    Are those speed prime stable?
  • athlon2004 - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link

    Are those speeds prime stable?
  • athlon2004 - Sunday, October 31, 2004 - link

  • nitenichiryu1 - Saturday, October 30, 2004 - link

    great article. what was the core of the 3500+ chip? was it newcastle or winchester for the 90nm? and is there any difference between these two cores? on sites such as newegg and zipzoomfly, the 90nm 3500+ are advertised as winchester on zipzoomfly and neweggs are advertised as newcastles. thanks
  • Wesley Fink - Saturday, October 23, 2004 - link

    #73 -
    You normally have to drop HT at higher overclocks, to keep the aggregate somewhere in the 1000HT range. Some boards handle higher HT than others. Since x3 HT was used for the 290x9 benchmarks in the review, I think it should be clear that the lower HT ratio does not adversely affect performance as long as the HT is somewhere around 800 or greater. 290x3 is an HT of 870.

    4X HT usually stops working around 260 to 275 (1040 to 1100) on most boards that support 1000HT (5X) and you need to drop to x3. As a side note, none of the 1000HT boards we have tested work well at 2x HT.
  • DaveHull - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link

    Wesley,

    One thing I've noticed when overclocking the MSI board with the 3000+ A64 (same as in the review) is that you have to lower the Hyper Transport (HT) from x5 to x3 to get the overclock of 290 FSB, giving an HT speed of 870 mhz instead of the stock 1000 mhz. My cpu/board refuses to run at a HT speed of over 1070.

    Is this true of the overclock in the article? Will the decreased HT speed negate the performance benefits of the overclock in any practical areas?

    Thank you,

    Dave
  • Furen - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link

    actually, disregard the above. The PQI 1024DP has a higher latency rating, the one you'd need for DDR570 is the 1024DBU, which is $245... stupid dealtime and it's incorrect linking ^^ (yeah, I'll blame it on dealtime)
  • Furen - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link

    For all you people asking questions about ram, here's an alternative: =)

    You could always use the PQI 3200 Turbo, which supports speeds of up to DDR570 and goes for $172.00 at newegg, here's the link:

    http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproductdesc.asp?DEPA...

    This ram was reviewed here at anandtech and while not as insanely good as the OCZ EL Platinum, the performance compared to other ram was not too bad. As mentioned in the review, though it has lifetime warranty, the manufacturer is a new name, so the support service is a big unknown.

    Furthermore, running the FSB at 285MHz instead of 290MHz will give you an overclock that is 45Mhz lower (2.565GHz) but the ram being 100 dollars cheaper is worth it, in my opinion.
  • AlphaFox - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link

    anyone notice the price for these things is going UP after AMD just lowered their price? newegg had them for $199, up from $189 a few days ago, now its $215!!! HELLO, the prices are supposed to go DOWN after AMD loweres the price!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now