Gaming Performance
It is very interesting that almost all the game benchmarks are slightly higher on the 2.4GHz 1MB cache 4000+ than on the 4200+ Dual-Core (2.2GHz with 512KB Cache on each core). As Anand pointed out in the X2 launch article, this is in line with AMD's claims. Gaming today is heavily single threaded and the dual core performs about the same as a similar speed single core. However, the difference between the 4000+ and 4200+ is generally very small.Most of the gaming benchmarks respond very well with the X2 overclock to 2.7GHz and yield impressive performance returns with the extra 500MHz.
Looking closely it is very interesting that two of the most recent games, Doom 3 and Half Life 2, seem to have their performance almost entirely dictated by the graphics card. With the increases in graphics power we tested all games at 1280x1024 where possible. Whether 2.2GHz, 2.4GHz with double the cache, or 2.7GHz, Doom 3 and Half Life 2 performed about the same using the same graphics card at the same 1280x1024 resolution.
The game benchmarks we use for memory testing were much more responsive to processor speed increases. Wolfenstein ET saw a 18.4% increase in a 22.5% CPU speed boost, and Q3 increased 16%. UT2004 performed similarly at 16%, while Far Cry was in-between at 9.5%. These results should give you a good idea of why we use Wolfenstein-ET and Q3 for memory benchmarking.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
53 Comments
View All Comments
Viditor - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
"$500 would get you started on an Intel i955 motherboard and cpu, so why would you invest in the end-of-the-road on AMD socket 939 and old DDR1? It's crazy"Because we're more interested in computers than space heaters? :-)
porkster - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
$500 would get you started on an Intel i955 motherboard and cpu, so why would you invest in the end-of-the-road on AMD socket 939 and old DDR1? It's crazy..
dumbnewbie - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
Can anyone speculate as to when a <12" laptop would be made with a dualcore (if at all)?LoneWolf15 - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
Would have been nice to see the X2 4400+ in this mix too. It would answer several questins:a)Do the 1MB caches make it harder to overclock, or does it still go as high as the 512k models?
b)Will the extra cache make for a worthwhile performance increase over the 512k model for the extra $50 or so, and if it does, which apps could benefit the most?
I think most of us won't be able to afford the $800-$1,000 chips, but if you're going to spend for the 4200+, you might consider spending the extra for the 4400+ if it yielded more benefits. It'd be worth knowing.
cryptonomicon - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
hmm, this isnt that interesting, except it shows that the chip can OC... but its logical to assume it could hit the 2.5-2.8ghz ceiling like most a64s on the market right now. it would have been impressive if it did 3g.now the more interesting thing was the TCCD overclock. to me this indicates that AMD has worked on creating a much more robust memory controller. that was the main weakness of the a64 chip, and with it improved, some amazing ram OCs will be possible.
yacoub - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
So is a 4200+ running at 2.64GHz a 5000+? :)Does that make a 4400+ at similar speeds a 5200+?
yacoub - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
*about to turn to Page 2*Sweet! I hope they stick Rome: Total War in their gaming test comparisons! I'd love to see if having a dual-core chip runs the game smoother during large battles, as that would directly influence my coming PC upgrade.
*skips ahead quickly to Gaming Performance page and looks at game titles on charts*
Oh well, maybe one day... =\
ceefka - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
Like Dubb said, it would be interesting to see how these X2's stack up against 2 CPU (Opteron and Xeon) workstations.I like the idea of a 4400+ in my new DAW. An X2 with the right chipset should be able to handle massive loads of multitrack audio, not just 5.1.
Wesley, can you do a Thonex in the next dual-core Intel vs AMD comparison? A 2-3 year old PC would be brought to its knees, it's quite a heavy thing. The point is to get that whole load to play at the least possible latency and compare CPU-loads. Please include a nF3 board also when you do get to this.
Diasper - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
Aboput my point earlier - of course at this stage it may be somewhat problematic to check against all those questions as alot of things eg gaming will be testing only 1CPU etc - but suffice to say some sort of projections should be able to be made when we might have a game drawing on both CPUS simultaneously.A challenge :)
Any game demos for dual cores out there to test against?
MAME - Thursday, June 23, 2005 - link
you should have included a stock 4800+ to the benchmarks for a good comparison