Mainstream
CPU performance
(Detail Comparison) |
|
GENERAL
APPLICATION |
|
Benchmark |
|
|
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. |
Business Winstone
SYSmark 2004
Microsoft Office XP SP-2
Internet Browsing (Firefox)
Picture Viewer (ACD See)
CD Burning (Ahead Nero Express)
File Compression (WinZip)
File Compression (WinRAR) |
|
|
WINNER:
ATHLON 64 3200+ |
|
P4
530 / 531 |
|
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0 |
|
base |
|
P4
630 |
|
105.2
103.0
100.0
107.8
105.5
95.9
95.5
104.9
|
|
+2.2% |
|
A64
3000+ |
|
108.8
86.6
98.9
127.1
109.6
108.0
94.6
126.7
|
|
+7.5% |
|
A64
3200+ |
|
108.9
90.5
99.8
133.1
117.2
108.0
99.1
128.0
|
|
+10.6% |
|
|
|
| Business Winstone and SYSmark 2004 basically
tested on Microsoft Office XP and some other supporting software
such as Norton Antivirus and voice recognition applications. The
testing methods are different, hence lead to different results.
Athlon64 managed to win in Business Winstone and Pentium 4 in SYSmark
2004. Besides, the larger but slower cache of P4 630 has some disadvantages
shown in Ahead Nero and Winzip. |
|
| |
MULTITASKING
APPLICATION |
|
Benchmark |
|
|
1
2
3
4
5
|
Multimedia CC Winstone
3D CC SYSmark
2D CC SYSmark
Web Publication SYSmark
Mozilla + WME 9.0 |
|
|
| WINNER:
PENTIUM 4 630 |
|
P4
530 / 531 |
|
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0 |
|
base |
|
P4
630 |
|
103.1
100.0
99.1
97.2
116.6 |
|
+3.2% |
|
A64
3000+ |
|
99.3
80.1
78.5
84.1
110.6 |
|
-9.5% |
|
A64
3200+ |
|
104.0
88.8
92.6
94.2
118.4 |
|
-0.4% |
|
|
|
Let's talk abit about Multitasking 1st. There
are 2 types nowadays: Time sharing and Simultaneous Multitasking.
You need to know this before choosing the correct CPU.
Time sharing has NOT MUCH difference from single tasking. You are
basically running many programs but only one of them active per time
(opened MS Word, Excel, Powerpoint, but you only typing in MS Word).
Thus, you are just working on one application per time and other applications
idle in the background. Hyper Threading won't help much at all. In
this case you are just wasting money on Hyper Threading.
Simultaneous Multitasking means, the software you openend are running
together. For example, while Norton Antivirus is scanning the system
in background and you are typing documents with Microsoft Word at
the same time. This is where Hyper Threading kicks in, and Pentium
4 is a better processor.
Another scenario is running full load program in background such as
Folding @ Home. Actually the program is set to 'low priority' by default,
so running this in background with some light foreground application
or gaming in foreground isn't considered as simultaneous multitasking.
It's because Folding @ Home won't compete with other applications
to take CPU resources, as it is set to low priority.
However, if you are just running light programs like Winamp or MSN
messenger in the background (both software takes very little CPU resources
when running), and typing your document in MS Word, Hyper Threading
won't help much either. Hence, what I want to say is, Hyper Threading
shows its true potential only when two or more HEAVY programs are
running simultaneously.
In the benchmark above, most of them are using heavy programs to run
at the same time. Therefore, Pentium 4 is the winner. |
|
| |
PHOTO
& VIDEO EDITING |
|
Benchmark |
|
|
1
2
3
4 |
Adobe Photoshop 7.0
Adobe Photoshop CS
Adobe Premier 6.5
Roxio Movie Creator 1.5 |
|
|
| WINNER:
ATHLON 64 3200+ |
|
P4
530 / 531 |
|
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
|
|
base |
|
P4
630 |
|
110.0
108.3
107.2
108.2
|
|
+8.5% |
|
A64
3000+ |
|
107.7
87.2
123.9
89.4 |
|
+2.1% |
|
A64
3200+ |
|
117.1
97.3
128.7
97.4 |
|
+10.1% |
|
|
|
There's a mixed result in the benchmark above.
Photoshop 7 seemed to run faster on AMD system while Photoshop CS
on Intel system. Actually, both of them are using different filter
as test bench. In photoshop 7.0, the benchmarker used filter which
favours AMD and vice versa in Photoshop CS. I would say both processor
has its good and bad in Photoshop, and the results are very dependant
on which filter you are using.
Adobe Premier and Roxio Movie creator are video editing software,
both supports Hyper Threading. However, Athlon64 is able to win in
professional editing software (Premier) but lost in entry level one
(Roxio). |
|
| |
AUDIO
& VIDEO ENCODING |
|
Benchmark |
|
|
1
2
3
4
5
|
MusicMatch Jukebox 7.10
Windows Media Encoder 9
Lame MP3 3.96
MPEG-2 Encoding
MPEG-4 Encoding |
|
|
| WINNER:
PENTIUM 4 630 |
|
P4
530 / 531 |
|
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0 |
|
base |
|
P4
630 |
|
110.3
115.7
NA
NA
NA |
|
+13.0% |
|
A64
3000+ |
|
102.5
103.1
89.9
55.0
81.0
|
|
-13.7% |
|
A64
3200+ |
|
111.5
112.4
100.9
69.3
89.1 |
|
-3.4% |
|
|
|
| Athlon 64 does well in MusicMatch and Window Media
Encoder. However, if you don't use the them, but Lame MP3 or MPEG
encoder, you should choose Pentium 4 as Athlon64 performance are really
pathetic due to the lack of Hyper Threading. I'm sorry I couldn't
find results of P4 630 in some benchmark, but I think 630 performs
better than 530. |
|
| |
GAMING
APPLICATION |
|
Benchmark |
|
|
1
2
3
4
5
|
Doom 3
Unreal Tournament 2004
Wolfenstein: ET
Quake III
Far Cry |
|
|
| WINNER:
ATHLON 64 3200+ |
|
P4
530 / 531 |
|
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0 |
|
base |
|
P4
630 |
|
102.9
102.2
101.8
NA
NA |
|
+2.3% |
|
A64
3000+ |
|
111.9
107.3
105.2
105.8
111.5 |
|
+8.3% |
|
A64
3200+ |
|
118.5
116.2
114.7
114.9
117.3 |
|
+16.3% |
|
|
|
| Most of you already knew AMD is the king in gaming.
I need not to comment much here as it is pretty clear from the comparison
table who's the winner. |
|
| |
3D
MODEL RENDERING |
|
Benchmark |
|
|
1
2
3
4
5
6 |
3D StudioMax 6.0
Lightwave (Lightscape)
Pro / Engineer
SolidWork
Unigraphic
Lightwave (MAYA) |
|
|
| WINNER:
A64 3200+ / P4 530 |
|
| *WINNER:
A64 3200+ / P4 630 |
|
P4
530 / 531 |
|
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0 |
|
base |
|
base |
|
P4
630 |
|
98.5
96.9
98.5
101.6
89.5
141.9 |
|
-3.0% |
|
+41.9% |
|
A64
3000+ |
|
84.3
91.1
94.1
94.5
96.1
128.1 |
|
-8.0% |
|
+28.1% |
|
A64
3200+ |
|
90.9
100.8
102.5
101.6
104.2
141.9 |
|
0.0% |
|
+41.9% |
|
|
|
In 3D StudioMax, Pentium 4 530 performs much better
than Athlon64 and also its bigger brother - P4 630. It's because P4
630 has slower cache compare to 530. In other appilcations however
(except Maya), 530 and 3200+ performs almost the same, but 3200+ managed
to outperform 530 by a slight margin. In overall (except Maya), P4
530 and 3200+ has the same performance.
However, when it comes to Maya rendering, P4 630 and Athlon64 rocks
the world. Pentium 4 530 is simply a pathetic loser in Maya. Thus,
if you are a Maya user all time, prevent yourself from purchasing
P4 530, BUT if you are a full time 3D Max-er, you should get P4 530.
Judging from the overall including Maya, Athlon64 3200+ is the best
choice as it performs equally with P4 530 and performs best in Maya. |
|
| |
SCIENCE
AND MATHS |
|
Benchmark |
|
|
1
2
|
Sciencemark Primordia
Mathematica 5.0 |
|
|
| WINNER:
ATHLON 64 3200+ |
|
P4
530 / 531 |
|
100.0
100.0 |
|
base |
|
|
A64
3000+ |
|
114.7
124.2 |
|
+19.4% |
|
A64
3200+ |
|
119.5
135.2 |
|
+27.3% |
|
|
|
| It's clear that Athlon64 wins a lot in Science
and Maths application. So if you are a scientist, mathematician or
Engineer who uses Matlab or Mathematica, don't choose Pentium 4. |
|
| |
SOFTWARE
DEVELOPMENT |
|
Benchmark |
|
|
1
2
|
MS Visual C++ Compile
MS Visual C++ Debug |
|
|
| WINNER:
ATHLON 64 3200+ |
|
P4
530 / 531 |
|
100.0
100.0 |
|
base |
|
|
A64
3000+ |
|
122.0
116.3 |
|
+19.1% |
|
A64
3200+ |
|
125.8
121.5 |
|
+23.6% |
|
|
|
| The results are similar to Science and Maths software.
Programmers out there, please avoid Pentium 4 if possible. |
|
| |
Copyright © 2005
Chan Yee Yong a.k.a. charge-n-go |
bravenet.com
