AMD 690G: Performance Review

by Gary Key on March 6, 2007 8:00 AM EST
Media Performance

We will take a brief look at general media performance with our test suite for that includes Adobe Photoshop CS3, Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0, and Windows Movie Maker.

We utilize the widely available Retouch Artists Photoshop Speed Test for measuring platform performance in Adobe's Photoshop CS3. The benchmark applies a number of actions to a test image while we measure the total time elapsed during the active portion of the test. We set history states to 1, cache levels to 4, and CS3 was configured to make use of all available system memory. The scores reported include the full conversion process and is represented in minutes/seconds, with lower numbers providing better performance.

Media Performance - Adobe Photoshop CS3

The results are once again interesting as we did not expect our AM2 systems to perform this well. Photoshop has favored the Intel Core 2 Duo greatly in the past and once again we are looking at a speed issue with the E6300 that allows the AM2 systems to be in the hunt.

Our next test is one recommended by Intel, but the test itself appears to be fair and results are very repeatable. This test simply measures the amount of time required to fix and optimize 103 different photos weighing in at 63MB. Time is measured in minutes and seconds, with lower times resulting in better performance:

Media Performance - Photoshop Elements 5.0

This test not only stresses the CPU but also gives the storage systems a good workout. Our 6150 platform barely edges out the Intel platform in a test where sheer CPU speed can make up the difference in elegant design. That sounds so familiar, are we talking about the differences between Athlon 64 and P4 NetBurst or Intel Core 2 Duo and Athlon 64 X2? Either way you cut it, the 6150 once again finishes ahead of the 690G due to better storage system performance.

Next on the list is our Windows Movie Maker test that will meld our European vacation content (recorded off TV) into a newly downloadable file that can be viewed on our Xbox 360 in a pleasing 720p format. The values reported are in minutes/seconds for the conversion time, with lower numbers being better.

Media Performance - Windows Movie Maker

Our Intel platform has a significant advantage in this test with the 6150 scoring better than the 690G in a test that stresses both the CPU and storage system again. These results were interesting as previous testing with this application indicated our AM2 platform would be a little more competitive.

File Compression Performance

In order to save space on our hard drives and ensure we had another CPU crunching utility, we will be reporting our file compression results with the latest version of WinRAR that fully supports multi-treaded operations and should be of particular interest for those users with dual core or multi-processor systems. Our series of file compression tests utilizes WinRAR 3.62 to compress our test folder that contains 444 files, ten subfolders, and 602MB worth of data. All default settings are utilized in WinRAR along with our hard drive being defragmented before each test.

File Compression Performance - WinRAR 3.62

Our G965 platform basically zips away from our two AM2 platforms in this test that heavily stresses the CPU subsystem and at times the storage system. The Core 2 Duo has always excelled in this benchmark and once again shows its strength. We were surprised that our two AM2 platforms scored this well with the advantage going to the NVIDIA 6150 due to better storage system throughput in our opinion.

Audio Encoding Performance Gaming Performance
Comments Locked

70 Comments

View All Comments

  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link

    What's worse is that the G965 scores almost twice as high in 3DMark06... and then falls flat on its face in actual gaming tests. (Well, most of them anyway.)
  • IntelUser2000 - Wednesday, March 14, 2007 - link

    quote:

    What's worse is that the G965 scores almost twice as high in 3DMark06... and then falls flat on its face in actual gaming tests. (Well, most of them anyway.)


    I think it might be combination of Vista too. Half Life 2 can score ~20 fps with G965 at the same settings AT tested at, when using Windows XP. I would also like to see how it performs it in XP. It seems G965 suffers more from Vista then other IGP.
  • chucky2 - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link

    I think it would be good insurance, given how amazingly late 690G is, to please confirm with AMD that 690G motherboards will definitly support the AM2+ CPU's this late summer/fall.

    And before people remind me that this is already fact, we have not to my knowledge see AMD themselves confirm this...which for something so seemingly simple to confirm, is getting distrubingly telling.

    When AnandTech updates their article and says that they've gone back and confirmed with AMD that all 690G boards being release with support AM2+, or AMD themselves says it, then we'll know for sure. Until then, it's rumor...

    Chuck
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link

    AMD has not officially stated whether the Agena/Kuma will be drop-in compatible with current AM2 chipsets (or even the AM2 socket). We'd certainly love to know, but we're still waiting along with everyone else.
  • chucky2 - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link

    Do they have any idea, and have you specifically put the question to them? I'm sure you have contacts at AMD...

    ...because from what I can tell, if a discrete graphics card is used, this chipset is looking like when Dr. Evil says, 1 million dollars! ...and then everyone is like, Uh, big deal...

    ...this thing should have released in Sept. of last year, and then become the defacto AMD chipset, not be released now - as you point out - with MCP68 right around the corner and the G35 coming also.

    This chipset really looks to me like a could have been. Good work ATI (and then AMD)!!!

    Chuck
  • Gary Key - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link

    We asked the question Chuck, have not received an official answer yet. While backwards compatibility has always been discussed as possible by AMD, we are still not convinced with any of the current motherboards. One only has to look at the Conroe launch last year and realize that while the chipsets were compatible, the motherboards were not without an update. We just recently saw this again with Kentsfield. We wish this chipset would have been released last fall also. ;)
  • chucky2 - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link

    Thanks Guys, that's about all I can ask for.

    I guess now I've got to really sit down and decide what's the best course of action for my godson and also cousins builds. Their both going to be budget builds, but I don't want to build them an AM2 system and basically have it be End Of Lifed in 3-4 months.

    You'd think if AMD wanted to stop the hemmoraging their seeing on the enthusiast side, they'd make a statement about AM2+ compatibility now, rather than wait and just keep loosing more and more. Not that a lot won't go over to the Intel side, but still, tell me 690G and say MCP68 will be the only AM2 chipsets that can take AM2+ CPU's, and now at least I've got a comfortable long term upgrade path.

    Leave me in doubt, I mine as well get a 1333FSB Intel board and go to the dark side...

    Looking forward to that mATX review...you think it'll be out this time next week, or towards Friday?

    Chuck
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link

    Honestly, the fact that AMD hasn't come out and said the next gen CPUs will work in AM2 speaks volumes in my book. Perhaps they are just trying to keep things quiet so that a bunch of people won't complain that their particular board won't run the new processors (some 939 boards wouldn't work with X2, after all, and there were some complaints saying AMD "guaranteed backwards compatibility). Hopefully that's all it is, but I am seriously concerned that Kuma and Agena will not work in the vast majority of AM2 boards - that's assuming they'll work in any at all.

    If AMD doesn't support older boards with the new processors, they are going to need some really impressive performance to keep people from raising Cain. As it stands, if a reasonably fast X2 5200+ or so isn't good enough for your long-term needs, I certainly wouldn't purchase a new AM2 system with the hope of an upgrade until the truth comes out.

    Final thought: The Quad FX platform has clearly been stated as being forwards compatible with native quad core Barcelona chips. If AMD is willing to make that commitment, why not make a similar commitment with AM2 and Agena/Kuma?
  • dmce - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link

    Are we going to see some details regarding HD (1080P) playback and whether it can do it comfortable or not. I appreciate you made a small comment about it, but this was lifted from the original look at the 690G chipset a few days ago so no real update in this review. Im just puzzled no sites are taking a closer look at this considering its surely one of, if not the whole point of HDMI being there?

    Im not interested at all in using this for games, i want a 1080p capable machine.
  • PokerGuy - Wednesday, March 7, 2007 - link

    I'm considering a board based on the 690G for my new HTPC, but now I see it won't be able to output 1080P? Yipes... even the lowly 6150 can output at 1080P, correct?

    Games are not important with regard to this board, but if it can't output at 1080p, what use would it be in a HTPC??

    Also, any ETA on when the mATX roundup will be released?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now