The Test and Business/General Use Performance

The Test
Our hardware configurations are similar to what we've used in previous comparisons.

AMD Athlon 64 Configuration

Socket-939 Athlon 64 CPUs
2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 EL Dual Channel DIMMs 2-2-2-10
ASUS nForce4 SLI Motherboard
ATI Radeon X800 XT PCI Express

Intel Pentium 4 Configuration

LGA-775 Intel Pentium 4 and Extreme Edition CPUs
2 x 512MB Crucial DDR-II 533 Dual Channel DIMMs 3-3-3-12
Intel 925XE and 945G Motherboards
ATI Radeon X800 XT PCI Express


Business/General Use Performance
Business Winstone 2004

Business Winstone 2004 tests the following applications in various usage scenarios:

. Microsoft Access 2002
. Microsoft Excel 2002
. Microsoft FrontPage 2002
. Microsoft Outlook 2002
. Microsoft PowerPoint 2002
. Microsoft Project 2002
. Microsoft Word 2002
. Norton AntiVirus Professional Edition 2003
. WinZip 8.1

Business Winstone 2004


Office Productivity SYSMark 2004

SYSMark's Office Productivity suite consists of three tests, the first of which is the Communication test. The Communication test consists of the following:

"The user receives an email in Outlook 2002 that contains a collection of documents in a zip file. The user reviews his email and updates his calendar while VirusScan 7.0 scans the system. The corporate web site is viewed in Internet Explorer 6.0. Finally, Internet Explorer is used to look at samples of the web pages and documents created during the scenario."

Communication SYSMark 2004


The next test is Document Creation performance, which shows very little difference in drive performance between the contenders:

"The user edits the document using Word 2002. He transcribes an audio file into a document using Dragon NaturallySpeaking 6. Once the document has all the necessary pieces in place, the user changes it into a portable format for easy and secure distribution using Acrobat 5.0.5. The user creates a marketing presentation in PowerPoint 2002 and adds elements to a slide show template."

Document Creation SYSMark 2004


The final test in our Office Productivity suite is Data Analysis, which BAPCo describes as:

"The user opens a database using Access 2002 and runs some queries. A collection of documents are archived using WinZip 8.1. The queries' results are imported into a spreadsheet using Excel 2002 and are used to generate graphical charts."

Data Analysis SYSMark 2004


Microsoft Office XP SP-2

Here we see in that the purest of office application tests, performance doesn't vary all too much.

Microsoft Office XP with SP-2


Mozilla 1.4

Quite possibly the most frequently used application on any desktop is the one we pay the least amount of attention to when it comes to performance. While a bit older than the core that is now used in Firefox, performance in Mozilla is worth looking at as many users are switching from IE to a much more capable browser on the PC - Firefox.

Mozilla 1.4


ACD Systems ACDSee PowerPack 5.0

ACDSee is a popular image editing tool that is great for basic image editing options such as batch resizing, rotating, cropping and other such features that are too elementary to justify purchasing something as powerful as Photoshop for. There are no extremely complex filters here, just pure batch image processing.

ACD Systems ACDSee PowerPack 5.0


Ahead Software Nero Express 6.0.0.3

While it was a major issue in the past, these days buffer underrun errors while burning a CD or DVD are few and far between thanks to high performance CPUs as well as vastly improved optical drives. When you take the optical drive out of the equation, how do these CPU's stack up with burning performance?

Ahead Software Nero Express 6.0.0.3


Winzip

Archiving performance ends up being fairly CPU bound as well as I/O limited.

WinZip Computing WinZip 8.1


Index Multitasking Content Creation
Comments Locked

56 Comments

View All Comments

  • Calin - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link

    Anyway, what's with the data analysis benchmark? Looks like every Pentium4 beats the hell out of every Athlon64.
    If this is true, then I feel my suggestions to buy Athlon64 might not always be correct
  • Calin - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link

    An processor with 1M level2 cache and dual channel memory controller is a preview of what to expect from a nice cheap 256K cache single channel memory controller? I really really don't think so
  • AtaStrumf - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link

    This isn't just a speed bump, it's a new revision (SH-E4 I think). Check PCU-Z next time!

    New Semprons with x86-64 will be even newer revisons - DH-E6 (don't know if that's good or bad yet, but very likely good) so OCing of this new E4 is like the most important thing here because nobody's gonna buy $1000 CPUs, nobody here anyway.

    FX-57 is a preview of what to expect of a nice cheap 3300+ Sempron and all you gave it was one line. Try a little harder next time please! If it's true that everybody else is getting 3,0 GHz on air, than that is great news. Just what we have been waiting for!!!
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link

    Overclocking is half luck, and there's no telling how the OC benches at other places are really performed. 2.75 GHz "easy" on a Winchester? Fat chance. Maybe with water cooling and the proper motherboard, but even then it's not guaranteed. And don't think the Venice cores are much better - they're really about the same, which means 2.6 to 2.7 GHz air cooled is the typical maximum for a truly stable system.

    Anyway, if you're into serious cooling and overclocking, the FX-57 might be a bit better than the FX-55. 90nm vs. 130nm I believe, so hopefully it does better. I just can't see dropping $1000 for a single threaded CPU, though. A 4000+ San Diego does almost as well at half the cost, even with overclocking.
  • composer - Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - link

    I don't get it? A AMD64 3200 Winny clocks easy at 2.75 with no problems.

    Why would someone in the know buy such a proc if they can get the same performance for little money?

    Also, why can't they get past 3.0 ghz yet? (air cooling, or do we need to wait for .65 nano?
  • JustAnAverageGuy - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link

    Page 1:

    "But as we have mentioned time and time again, steadily increasing clock speed over time is a loosing proposition. "

    'losing'

    Those macro buttons are getting overused. It's the same text in every review, just different charts. :)
  • Sunbird - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link

    The FX-57 is still being called a FX-55 in the Doom3 graphs.
  • Cygni - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link

    Oh, in other news, the only thing i felt missing was Dual core results. Could have deffinitly been used.
  • Cygni - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link

    Its a speedbump review... i dont think AT, or anybody else, really gives a shit.
  • cryptonomicon - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link

    uh, they used the dfi ultra-d to overclock right?

    else, that is just retarded.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now