All about Tweaking & Tuning
 Latest Tweaking & Tuning articles
All Tweaking & Tuning articles

Newsletters


  • Ask your question about IT issues
  • Post

Partners

The Games selection

action : Yoyo the Star Yoyo is a young girl who recently graduated and dreams to become a movie star (don't we all). You'll have to guide her on the path to stardom,...
kids : Bob Throw bubbles so as to make the ones that appear in the game disappear. For this, use the Right / Left arrow keys to duck or move about, and the...
Ads

Sponsored links

Synthetic Benchmarks

Previous Next
1:40 AM - 10/24/2008 by Paul Henningsen

First, we take a brief look at Futuremark’s popular synthetic benchmarks, 3DMark05 and 3DMark06. We run both at their default settings.

3DMark05 was released in September 2004, before dual-core desktop processors were launched, and just weeks prior to the Athlon 64 4000+’s release. So this was a top-of-the-line gaming processor at the time.

3DMark05 does not support multi-threading in the overall performance tests and as a result we see the higher clock speeds and larger L2 cache of the A64 4000+ allowing it to beat out the X2 4200+. The high-clocked X2 5600+, on the other hand, leaves both behind by more than 2,000 points. Unlike in its holistic tests, 3DMark05 does have a multi-threaded CPU test, and we see the X2 4200+ surpass the higher-clocked A64 4000+ in the CPU score.

3DMark06 was released in January 2006, which was over six months after Intel and AMD had dual-core CPUs on the market. Multi-threading support was now implemented in not only the CPU tests, but in the overall tests as well.

Looking at 3DMark06, we see very different results, as this time the X2 4200+ more than makes up for its lower clock speeds and pulls far ahead of the single-core A64 4000+. As a matter of fact, it is able to pull halfway up to the X2 5600+. In the CPU tests we see the A64 4000+ far behind the dual cores and unable to reach a four digit score.

Now that we see a growing advantage for the dual-core CPUs in these Futuremark synthetic benchmarks, it is time to move onto some games to see if these indications of future performance equate to better performance in games.

Talkback
schip 10/24/2008 8:07 AM
Hide
-3+

FIRST POST!!! Nice Article though. I knew my brother would soon be doomed with his P4 2.8c ;)

Anonymous 10/24/2008 8:33 AM
Hide
-5+

"AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200 + dual-core, which has a 2.2 GHz Manchester architecture with 512 MB L2 cache per core."
oau! that's a lot of cache :D

neiroatopelcc 10/24/2008 8:39 AM
Show
bf2gameplaya 10/24/2008 8:52 AM
Hide
-5+

2.8GHz Opteron 185 (up from 2.6GHz) with 2x1MB L2 cache is the ultimate s939 CPU....blows these weak benchmarks away.

Who would have thought DDR would have such durability? There's something to be said for CAS2!

cangelini 10/24/2008 8:53 AM
Hide
-0+

Surprisingly, you can actually do fairly well. Of course, it depends on the app...

neiroatopelcc 10/24/2008 8:57 AM
Hide
-3+

But your opteron cpu still limits the modern graphics cards.
Two years back I bought my 8800gtx, and realized it wouldn't come to its full potential in my opteron 170 (@ 2.7). A friend with another gtx paired with an e6400 chip (@ 3ghz) scored a full 30% higher in 3dmark than I, and it showed in games. Even in wow where you'd expect a casio calculator would deliver enough graphics power.

In short - ye ddr still work if you've got enthusiast parts, but that can't negate the effect a faster cpu would give. At least at decent resolutions (22" wide)

dirtmountain 10/24/2008 9:14 AM
Hide
-0+

This is a great article! It will give me something to show when i'm talking to people about a new system or just a GPU/PSU upgrade. Great job by Henningsen.

NoIncentive 10/24/2008 9:28 AM
Hide
-1+

I'm still using a P4 3.0 @ 3.4 with 1 GB DDR 400 and an nVidia 6800GT...

I'm building a new computer next week.

randomizer 10/24/2008 9:37 AM
Hide
-4+

I can echo the findings in Crysis. It didn't matter what settings I ran with a 3700 Sandy and an X1950 pro, the framerate was almost the same (albeit low 20s because the card is slower). Added an E6600 to the mix and my framerate tripled at lower settings.

It would have been interesting to see how a 3000+ Clawhammer (C0 stepping) would do in Crysis. Single-channel memory, poor overclocking capabilities... FAIL!

ravenware 10/24/2008 9:44 AM
Hide
-0+

bf2gameplaya :
2.8GHz Opteron 185 (up from 2.6GHz) with 2x1MB L2 cache is the ultimate s939 CPU....blows these weak benchmarks away.Who would have thought DDR would have such durability? There's something to be said for CAS2!



Thia ia true about the DDR. I recall an article on toms right after the release of the AM2 socket which tested identical dual core processors against their 939 counterparts; the tests showed little to no performance gains.

Great article, their has been some discussion about this in the forums as well.

I currently own a 939 4200+ x2 that's paired with a 7800GT; and this article shows what I thought to be accurate about the AMD64 chips. Their not as fast as some of the C2D's but they still kick ass.

Good job pointing out the single core factor in newer games too. As soon as the crysis demo was released I upgraded my San Diego core to a dual core and noticed the difference in crysis immediately.

This article gives me further confidence in my decision to hold on upgrading my system. I want to hold out for Windows7 D3D11 and more money to build an ape sh** machine :D

Nice article!!

demonhorde665 10/24/2008 9:58 AM
Show
demonhorde665 10/24/2008 10:00 AM
Show
demonhorde665 10/24/2008 10:20 AM
Show
giovanni86 10/24/2008 10:32 AM
Hide
-0+

Good article, enjoyed it very much considering i run a AMD Athlon 3500+ venice core and have a XFX 9800GTX. Runs great, but big battles are very choppy and any high demanding game like COD4 and CRYSIS i have to suffer by not being able to max out settings. I almost blamed the GPU but i knew sooner then later i had to upgrade to a newer system then just opting in a newer GPU. I had a 6600GT which did great for the time being but it showed its age this past year. Great article!

Groo 10/24/2008 10:41 AM
Hide
-0+

I figured my 3600+ brisbane was realy holding me back, even when
OC'd. when I got my 4850. looks like, for the most part it isn't because I like lots of eye candy.

I still plan on upgrading soon :)

demonhorde665 10/24/2008 10:49 AM
Hide
-0+

good article , i finaly finished reading it thoroughly , suffice to say with my current ssytem i don't ahve to worry much for teh moment , and i will upgrade my parts next year when thing start to be come more worrisome , again my current specs are

athlon 64 x2 5000+ BE (OC'ed to 2.9 ghz)
2 gigs ddr 2 pc 6400 (800) ram
gf 9600 GT
win xp home

by next year my specs will be
phenom (at elast a 9950 Black edition , not sure what ill overclock it to)
3 gigs ddr 2 pc 800 ram
and graphic card doest exsist yet , as i'm skipping the gf200/ati4800 series cards but it is a gaurantee my price range will be inside of 200-300

im not real worried definitely not going to be repalcing this ssytem for a good bit though.

neiroatopelcc 10/24/2008 10:59 AM
Show
mohdwahidi 10/24/2008 11:05 AM
Hide
-0+

thanks for the great article. this sure saves me a lot of money. i have AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ with HD4850. I can get to play Racedriver:GRID in Ultra setting. Reading your articles makes me think to upgrade it to 6000+.

da bahstid 10/24/2008 11:18 AM
Hide
-0+

I'm impressed to see that the single core athlon didn't completely crash and burn anywhere. Just for kicks it would have been funny to see it try to drive a 4870X2. I can definitely tell it weighs down my 6400+X2 even at 3.45GHz. Entertainment value aside, this is one of the more objectively conducted articles I've seen here recently, and I actually like seeing some of these oddball scenarios getting played out. I can second the finding that an Athlon X2 at 2.4GHz as a ballpark minimum for driving an 8800/9800 or 4800 series card. Fortunately most X2s can overclock to around 3+GHz...other hardware allowing.

chill_king 10/24/2008 11:27 AM
Hide
-0+

Interesting article. I find it amazing that its almost 2009 and i can still play the likes of stalker clear sky fairly well on my 939 asus a8n-sli motherboard that was released early 2005 with an aging 4200+ x2.

I've always avoided upgrades just for the sake of so called "future proofing" and so have been trying to get the most out of my 4200+ X2 which i've overclocked from 2.2 to 2.8ghz (rock solid stable).

Currently getting Getting 10500 in 3dmark06 and can handle most games to date at 1280 x 1024 bar crysis / warhead. I have 2 8800gt's in SLI so no GPU limitation there (i know its overkill but got them to use with my next rig).

However, got my copy of farcry 2 today which i expect to be the nail in the coffin for my 939. With the likes of deadspace and fallout 3 still to play im looking at an e8400 to give my 8800gt's something to chew on.


Comments are closed on this page.

Sponsored links