Application Performance using PC WorldBench 5

General Performance - WorldBench 5


Switching over to WorldBench 5, all of the scores become much closer. The spread between the fastest and slowest tested processor is only 38%, and overclocking of the E6300 and E6400 by 39% and 35% results in a 20% and 17% performance increase, respectively. Given the number of applications being tested in WorldBench 5, the overall results are not too surprising. Some tests are CPU limited while others are bottlenecked by hard drive performance. Athlon 64 X2 is more competitive in this benchmark, and the truth is that any of these systems would be more than fast enough for typical home/office use. If you want the fastest current CPU architecture, however, that title clearly belongs to Intel's Core 2.

WorldBench 5's applications are a bit older than those used in SYSMark 2004, and the data sets not as large - meaning that the smaller cache of the E6300 and E6400 has less of a negative impact. The result is that the 2.88GHz E6400 performs very close to the 2.93GHz X6800 and the 2.59GHz E6300 performs very close to the 2.66GHz E6700. Compared to AMD, the overclocked E6300 does quite well - at 2.592GHz the E6300 is already faster than AMD's Athlon 64 FX-62 - and we're talking $183.

Application Performance using SYSMark 2004 SE Application Performance using Winstone 2004
POST A COMMENT

137 Comments

View All Comments

  • getbush - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link

    There is a for that should be four and you start the oblivion page with will instead of we'll. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link

    Thanks - I gave the document a final proofing now that I'm a bit more coherent and squashed several more "typos" (speech-recognition-os?) I helped Anand fill in a bunch of the text, but it was late and my eyes weren't cooperating. LOL Reply
  • yacoub - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link

    What I see here is that the E6400 is easily the way to go for folks who aren't interested in overclocking but want the best bang-for-the-buck.

    For very little more $$ than the E6300, you get a chip that rides quite a bit higher up on the charts in many tests.

    Now the question: What affordable motherboard is recommended for stable, reliable non-overclocked C2D Conroe performance? Perhaps the Intel P965 board?

    There's no reason to drop $200-250 for a motherboard when you aren't going to utilize its overclocking functionality. I believe that opens up the user to the more affordable P965 boards, right? They tend to be more around $150 and if it's made by Intel it should be plenty stable, right?

    Also most boards now are passively-cooled which is excellent since the dinky fans on older motherboards were always noisy and died quickly. Avoiding those is another benefit as I believe the Intel P965 board is passively cooled as well.

    Thoughts?
    Reply
  • anandtechrocks - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link

    Check out the Gigabyte DS3. It uses the P965 chipset and costs ~$144. It overclocks just as well as the $250 Asus motherboard in this article and it uses very high quality solid capacitors. Only drawback is that no SLI or Crossfire. Reply
  • yacoub - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link

    I don't know, looks like there's some cause for concern about currently available 965 boards now...
    http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid...">http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...amp;thre...
    Reply
  • anandtechrocks - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link

    Very good article, I really enjoyed it. I think there is an error on page 4, on the 3rd graph from the bottom. The E6300 and E6400 bars are miss-labled. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link

    Fixed - thanks. Reply
  • code65536 - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link

    How do the OC'ed chips do with power consumption. Does a 6400 @ 2.88 use more or less power than a 6800, for example? Reply
  • supremelaw - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link

    ... and heat.

    I assume that the stock Intel HSF hasn't changed:

    http://www.supremelaw.org/systems/heatsinks/warnin...">http://www.supremelaw.org/systems/heatsinks/warnin...

    and that a superior HSF with proper backing plate
    is still recommended for Conroe CPUs, even though
    they run cooler in general.


    Sincerely yours,
    /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
    Webmaster, Supreme Law Library
    http://www.supremelaw.org/">http://www.supremelaw.org/
    Reply
  • houe - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link

    fp Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now