Multimedia Content Creation Performance

MCC Winstone 2004

Multimedia Content Creation Winstone 2004 tests the following applications in various usage scenarios:

  • Adobe® Photoshop® 7.0.1
  • Adobe® Premiere® 6.50
  • Macromedia® Director MX 9.0
  • Macromedia® Dreamweaver MX 6.1
  • Microsoft® Windows MediaTM Encoder 9 Version 9.00.00.2980
  • NewTek's LightWave® 3D 7.5b
  • SteinbergTM WaveLabTM 4.0f

All chips were tested with Lightwave set to spawn 4 threads.

Content Creation Application Performance

Once again, we're back to both NVIDIA and Intel offering nearly identical performance.


ICC SYSMark 2004

The first category that we will deal with is 3D Content Creation. The tests that make up this benchmark are described below:

"The user renders a 3D model to a bitmap using 3ds max 5.1, while preparing web pages in Dreamweaver MX. Then the user renders a 3D animation in a vector graphics format."

3D Content Creation Performance

Next, we have 2D Content Creation performance:

"The user uses Premiere 6.5 to create a movie from several raw input movie cuts and sound cuts and starts exporting it. While waiting on this operation, the user imports the rendered image into Photoshop 7.01, modifies it and saves the results. Once the movie is assembled, the user edits it and creates special effects using After Effects 5.5."

2D Content Creation Performance

The Internet Content Creation suite is rounded up with a Web Publishing performance test:

"The user extracts content from an archive using WinZip 8.1. Meanwhile, he uses Flash MX to open the exported 3D vector graphics file. He modifies it by including other pictures and optimizes it for faster animation. The final movie with the special effects is then compressed using Windows Media Encoder 9 series in a format that can be broadcast over broadband Internet. The web site is given the final touches in Dreamweaver MX and the system is scanned by VirusScan 7.0."

Web Publication Performance

Content Creation performance is identical across the board.

Business Application Performance General Performance - PC WorldBench 5
Comments Locked

96 Comments

View All Comments

  • mkruer - Thursday, April 14, 2005 - link

    The only reason why Intel allowed Nvidia to make a chipset for them was for the SLI. Intel is worried, and rightfuly so that Nvidia's SLI sloution for AMD whould give AMD an advantage.
  • Questar - Thursday, April 14, 2005 - link

    "Honestly, Intel processors and even the platform haven’t been interesting since the introduction of Prescott. They have been too hot and poor performers, not to mention that the latest Intel platforms forced a transition to technologies that basically offered no performance benefits (DDR2, PCI Express)."

    Your opinion only, don't make this out to be fact.

    "at the end of the day, Intel would still be happier if there was no threat from companies like NVIDIA"

    nVidia (please print it correctly) is not a "threat" to Intel in the chipset market. They couldn't make a P4 chipset without a license from Intel. If Intel was threatened by them they wouldn't sell them a license. The purpose in licensing is give system builders more choice in design features.

    "However Intel’s chipset team has reason to worry; motherboard manufacturers weren’t happy with the 925/915 chipsets, and with a viable alternative in NVIDIA, we may very well have an opportunity for NVIDIA to start eating into Intel’s own chipset market share in a way that no other company has in the past"

    Intel probably makes as much net profit off the licensing of the nVidia chipset as they do selling thier own - after all thay don't have to design, build, ship or sell anything. So why would they be worried?

    Really Anand, you have to begin thinking these things trough.
  • Houdani - Thursday, April 14, 2005 - link

    Grrr, I should have noted that I was referring to the NCQ testing.
  • Houdani - Thursday, April 14, 2005 - link

    Anand: For the Intel DC Preview, what would you say was the queue depth during the various multitasking tests? I'm curious how today's test compares with how you tested the Intel DC in the preview.

    Also, is the relation between a depth of 8 versus a depth of 32 linear? Would there be any value in testing a depth somewhere in the middle, such as 16 and/or 24?

    Thanks yet again for the quality work!
  • ChineseDemocracyGNR - Thursday, April 14, 2005 - link

    "NVIDIA does not support Intel’s HD Audio spec, so you’re stuck with AC’97 on the nForce4 SLI. "

    That's inexcusable for a $80 chipset, IMO.
  • ksherman - Thursday, April 14, 2005 - link

    cool and all, but is there any variation of the Intel-based SLI vs the AMD Based SLI?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now