Multitasking Office Performance

Our first test is actually the scripted Multitasking Winstone 2004 test. We’ve used this test in the past, and it serves as an excellent example of relatively light general use multitasking performance. The test consists of three parts, all of which are described below:
"This test uses the same applications as the Business Winstone test, but runs some of them in the background. The test has three segments: in the first, files copy in the background while the script runs Microsoft Outlook and Internet Explorer in the foreground. The script waits for both foreground and background tasks to complete before starting the second segment. In that segment, Excel and Word operations run in the foreground while WinZip archives in the background. The script waits for both foreground and background tasks to complete before starting the third segment. In that segment, Norton AntiVirus runs a virus check in the background while Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Project, Microsoft Access, Microsoft PowerPoint, Microsoft FrontPage, and WinZip operations run in the foreground."
We’ve been playing around with multitasking performance tests for several months now, and have found that even scripted tests like the Multitasking Winstone test require a lot of work to get to produce repeatable results. The problem mostly boils down to making sure that all of the tasks executing simultaneously do so in the exact same manner, every single time, across all platforms, CPUs and other configuration changes. Honestly, doing so is very difficult and it often requires far more benchmarking runs than we are used to performing for most of our other tests. But at the end of the day, it is possible to get results that do make some sort of sense, and spending a great deal of time with Multitasking Winstone and our own home-brew tests, we have done just that.

Multitasking Winstone DDR400 DDR480 % Improvement
Test 1 2.21 2.37 7.2%
Test 2 2.94 3.05 3.7%
Test 3 4.82 4.88 1.2%

The first test proved to be the most impressive out of the bunch, showing a 7.2% increase in performance over stock DDR400. Note that a 7.2% performance advantage is greater than what we’d see when going from an Athlon 64 X2 4400+ to a 4800+.

The second test still produced reasonably good results, showing a 3.7% increase in performance. The third and final test shows that not all situations will yield a tangible performance increase.

Although it is a canned benchmark, Multitasking Winstone 2004 gives us a very good idea of what is to come. But in order to truly find out if higher bandwidth memory is worth it for Athlon 64 X2 owners, we turned to some of our own home-brew multitasking benchmarks.

Index Multitasking with Adobe Photoshop CS
Comments Locked

23 Comments

View All Comments

  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Friday, August 12, 2005 - link

    DDR480 is the fastest speed you can run on the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ on the DFI board using the new dividers. DDR500 is possible on the Athlon 64 X2 3800+.

    Take care,
    Anand
  • Diasper - Friday, August 12, 2005 - link

    Also, a further point might be to examine how running 4 x 512MB sticks at 2T might affect things - I guess we can say the bandiwidth loss of running it at 2T will affect performance significantly so compared to someone running DDR500 @1T with decent timings.
  • Diasper - Friday, August 12, 2005 - link

    Moreover, I guess AMD's move to DDR2 does begin to make sense as when both cores are fully taxed that bandwidth will be needed.

    DDR2 is set to get cheaper while timings are also tightening
    eg Corsair's new 512MB sticks that are rated at 3-2-2 675mhz stuff and have been o/c to around 709mhz or their 1GB sticks which are doing 3-3-3 at DDR533 (http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?page=4&...">http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?page=4&...

    In short it seems that DDR2 is getting much closer performancewise to DDR but offers guaranteed bandwidth which X2 can clearly benefit from. 1GB modules that do DDR500 are few and expensive whereas while that's still true of DDR2 now, DDR2 is still being developed where we will see future refinements providing lower latencies/higher speeds at an increasingly affordable price point - DDR is no longer being developed while it is feasible that DDR and especially premium sticks might get more expensive as the market slowly shrinks.

    In all, AMD have probably picked a rather opportune time to migrate to DDR2.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now