<!–#set var="article_header" value="Speed Isn't Everything:
P4/2800 Meets Athlon XP 2600+” –>
Fleeing To The Front: The New Top Model, Intel P4/2800
Recent events in the world of CPUs have been comparable to a duel on a lonely German autobahn on a warm summer night: the big Mercedes, equipped with all options, drives on at consistently high speed and thus manages to remain in the lead. Suddenly, unexpectedly, the Ferrari (fitted with standard options only, no aircon) comes up from behind and overtakes the Mercedes, and both cars jockey for the lead.
It’s a close race – sometimes the Ferrari overtakes the Mercedes and vice versa. We’re talking figuratively about Intel P4/2533 and AMD Athlon XP 2600+, of course – and now Intel introduces a new model that reaches new extremes in speed, taking full advantage of PC1066. And so, the Mercedes gradually manages to pull ahead of the Ferrari. The AMD XP’s recent triumph was short-lived.
The new top model: Intel Pentium 4 with 2800 MHz.
Yes indeed, it was only a few days ago that AMD proudly launched the Athlon XP 2600+, which we put through a comprehensive test (see At The Last Second: AMD’s Trump Card – The Athlon XP 2600+). It was exactly five days before the launch of the Intel Pentium 4/2800, which had been planned months ago. And AMD has been under extra pressure because the Athlon XP with the Thoroughbred “A” core should have made up for a 1000 MHz deficit. Now, the P4/2800 has been launched, and the gap has been reduced to 666 MHz.
To be exact, Intel has introduced four new processors that will be sure to please users who own older motherboards/ chipsets, and who want to upgrade their CPU. For this crowd, Intel has 2.50 GHz and 2.60 GHz variations ready to go, with 100 MHz FSB. The P4/2666 and the P4/2800, on the other hand, with an FSB clock of 133 MHz, promise to bring more speed to the newest platforms. In order to give you an in-depth account of the performance of the two P4 versions (100 MHz and 133 MHz), we put the new CPUs through rigorous testing.
Data of the new P4 with 2800 MHz.
The Limit Approaches: More Voltage For P4/2800
Compared to its lower-clocked variant, the P4/2800 runs with a marginally higher voltage of 1.525 Volt.
With the previous variants of the Pentium 4 (up to 2533 MHz), the core voltage remained constant at 1.500 Volt. It’s a different picture with the new CPUs with higher clock speeds: the P4/2800 requires a voltage of 1.525 Volt – that’s an increase of 0.025 Volt. This fact alone leads to the conclusion that Intel wants to automatically guarantee better results by increasing the core voltage by 1.6%. It shouldn’t be a problem for the motherboards to adapt to this, since the voltage values are contained in the CPU as data, and this is automatically read and adjusted by the motherboard logic.
Optimal For Overclocking: P4/2500 With 100 MHz FSB
It all ends with 3100 MHz: the P4/2800 is not as suitable for overclocking compared to the P4/2500 with 100 MHz FSB.
An important rule for overclocking Intel CPUs is the following: you need a lower FSB clock, plus a high multiplier value, because it’s not possible to adjust this factor as you can with all AMD CPUs. The P4/2500 variant, for example, is factory-set to run with 25 x 100 MHz (2500 MHz), and this alone makes it optimal for extreme overclocking.
By contrast, the P4/2666 and P4/2800 don’t look too good when it comes to overclocking. Increasing the FSB clock stops at 150 MHz at the latest (based on a motherboard equipped with the Intel 850 chipset and RDRAM). For both CPUs, this means that only 17 MHz is left available for a clock increase. The clock limit of the P4/2800 thus lies at 3150 MHz (150 MHz x 21), or an increase of 12.5%. It’s different with the P4/2500 with 100 MHz FSB: by increasing the FSB clock from 100 MHz to 133 MHz, the CPU runs at 3325 MHz (133 MHz x 25) – that’s a 33% increase.
The P4/2800 overclocked to 148 MHz FSB. When using conventional cooling, higher clocks are not possible in combination with RDRAM.
Weak-Chested: P4/2600
It’s not so long ago that Intel officially bid adieu to the outdated and slow 100 MHz FSB clock by introducing the P4/2533. And now it’s back again. However, we find that it makes little sense to re-introduce processors with 100 MHz FSB, even if marketing strategists want to make it attractive for OEM manufacturers who still have old 100 MHz FSB boards in stock. There is a stark difference in performance compared to CPUs with 133 MHz FSB, which is clearly shown in our extensive benchmark results.
AMD Responds: Athlon XP 2800+ Coming Up In October
The next step in evolution for the AMD Athlon has been planned: the manufacturer is going to launch an Athlon XP 2800+ based on the new Thoroughbred B core. In the previous comparison, we showed how overclockable the Athlon XP 2600+, which officially runs at 2133 MHz, is. We were easily able to overclock it to a stable 2400 MHz, using a conventional CPU cooler. This clock speed corresponds to an Athlon XP 3000+. AMD has to be on the offensive when it reacts to the P4/2800, so it’s obvious that the Athlon XP 2800+ will be launched by the end of October at the latest. As the past has shown, AMD cannot afford to lose ground with regard to clock speed.
Comparison: 12 Different Chipsets For P4
The table below lists all chipsets for the Socket 478 platform. In any case, if you count the chips that are soon to come, there is a total of 12 different chips from Intel, SiS and VIA for the Pentium 4. Regarding the best performance, the Intel chipsets should be well-positioned, while VIA’s P4X chipset, which, strictly speaking, does not have a license, is at somewhat of a disadvantage. The development at SiS is interesting: the manufacturer has a license and is working on the SiS 658, which is the first chipset from this company with a Rambus memory interface.
| Chipset | Intel 850E | Intel 845G | Intel 845E | SiS 648 |
| Introduction | May 2002 | May 2002 | May 2002 | July 2002 |
| Processor Platform | Socket 478 | Socket 478 | Socket 478 | Socket 478 |
| Supported CPU | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 |
| Chipset Northbridge | Intel KC82850E | Intel RG82845G | Intel RG8245EES | SiS 648 |
| Chipset Southbridge | Intel 82801 BA | Intel 82801 DB | Intel 82801 DB | SiS 961 |
| Front Side Bus Clock | 100/133 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 100/133 MHz |
| Memory Clock | 400 MHz/533 MHz | 100/133/166 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 400/533/600 MHz |
| Asynchronous Memory Clock | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| FSB Overclocking | up to 166 MHz | up to 166 MHz | up to 166 MHz | up to 200 MHz |
| max. # DIMM-Slots | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 |
| max. Memory | 2048 MB | 3072 MB | 3072 MB | 2048 MB |
| SDRAM Support | no | yes | yes | no |
| DDR SDRAM Support | no | yes | yes | yes |
| VC SDRAM Support | no | no | no | no |
| RDRAM Support (Rambus) | yes | no | no | no |
| Dual RDRAM Support (Rambus) | yes | no | no | no |
| Ultra-DMA/33/66/100 | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes |
| Ultra-DMA/133 | no | no | no | yes |
| Max. # USB | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| USB 2.0 | no | yes | yes | yes |
| Max.# PCI Slots | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Integrated Graphics | no | yes | no | yes |
| AGP 1x / 2x / 4x | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes |
| AGP 8x | no | no | no | yes |
| ACPI Features | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Chipset | SiS 645DX | SiS 645 | Intel 850 | Intel 845D |
| Introduction | March 2002 | November 2001 | January 2001 | December 2001 |
| Processor Platform | Socket 478 | Socket 478 | Socket 423/478 | Socket 478 |
| Supported CPU | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 |
| Chipset Northbridge | SiS 645DX | SiS 645 | Intel KC82850 | Intel 82845 |
| Chipset Southbridge | SiS 961 | SiS 961 | Intel 82801 BA | Intel 82801 BA |
| Front Side Bus Clock | 100/133 MHz | 100 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 66/100/133 MHz |
| Memory Clock | 100/133/166/200 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 400 MHz | 100/133 MHz |
| Asynchronous Memory Clock | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| FSB Overclocking | up to 166 MHz | up to 133 MHz | up to 133 MHz | up to 166 MHz |
| max. # DIMM-Slots | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 |
| max. Memory | 3072 MB | 3072 MB | 2048 MB | 2048 MB |
| SDRAM Support | yes | yes | no | no |
| DDR SDRAM Support | yes | yes | no | yes |
| VC SDRAM Support | no | no | no | no |
| RDRAM Support (Rambus) | no | no | yes | no |
| Dual RDRAM Support (Rambus) | no | no | yes | no |
| Ultra-DMA/33/66/100 | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes |
| Ultra-DMA/133 | no | no | no | no |
| Max. # USB | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| USB 2.0 | no | no | no | no |
| Max.# PCI Slots | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Integrated Graphics | yes | yes | no | no |
| AGP 1x / 2x / 4x | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes |
| AGP 8x | no | no | no | no |
| ACPI Features | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Chipset | Intel 845 | VIA P4X333 | VIA P4X266 | VIA P4X266A |
| Introduction | July 2001 | May 2002 | August 2001 | December 2001 |
| Processor Platform | Socket 423/478 | Socket 478 | Socket 423/478 | Socket 478 |
| Supported CPU | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 | Intel Pentium 4 |
| Chipset Northbridge | Intel 82845 | VIA P4X333 | VIA VT8753 | VIA P4X266A |
| Chipset Southbridge | Intel 82801 BA | VIA VT8233A | VIA VT8233 | VIA VT8233A |
| Front Side Bus Clock | 66/100/133 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 100 MHz | 100 MHz |
| Memory Clock | 100/133 MHz | 100/133/166 MHz | 100/133 MHz | 100/133 MHz |
| Asynchronous Memory Clock | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| FSB Overclocking | up to 180 MHz | up to 200 MHz | up to 180 MHz | up to 180 MHz |
| max. # DIMM-Slots | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| max. Memory | 2048 MB | 3072 MB | 4096 MB | 3072 MB |
| SDRAM Support | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| DDR SDRAM Support | no | yes | yes | yes |
| VC SDRAM Support | no | yes | yes | yes |
| RDRAM Support (Rambus) | no | no | no | no |
| Dual RDRAM Support (Rambus) | no | no | no | no |
| Ultra-DMA/33/66/100 | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes | yes/yes/yes |
| Ultra-DMA/133 | no | yes | no | yes |
| Max. # USB | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| USB 2.0 | yes | yes | no | yes |
| Max.# PCI Slots | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Integrated Graphics | no | no | no | no |
| AGP 1x / 2x / 4x | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes | yes / yes / yes |
| AGP 8x | no | yes | no | yes |
| ACPI Features | yes | yes | yes | yes |
Price Comparison: P4 vs. Athlon XP
| Processor | Price per 1000 |
| Intel Pentium 4/2800A | US$ 508 |
| Intel Pentium 4/2666A | US$ 401 |
| Intel Pentium 4/2533A | US$ 243 |
| Intel Pentium 4/2400A | US$ 201 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2600+ | US$ 297 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2400+ | US$ 193 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2200+ | US$ 183 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2100+ | US$ 174 |
Test Setup and Details
| Intel Hardware & Software (Socket 478) | |
| Processors 133 MHz FSB 533 MHz Memory Clock |
Pentium 4 2.8 GHz (2800 MHz) Pentium 4 2.6 GHz (2666 MHz) Pentium 4 2.5 GHz (2533 MHz) Pentium 4 2.4 GHz (2400 MHz) Pentium 4 2.3 GHz (2266 MHz) |
| Processors 100 MHz FSB 400 MHz Memory Clock |
Pentium 4 2.4 GHz (2400 MHz) Pentium 4 2.2 GHz (2200 MHz) Pentium 4A 2.0 GHz (2000 MHz) Pentium 4A 1.8 GHz (1800 MHz) Pentium 4A 1.6 GHz (1600 MHz) Pentium 4 2.0 GHz (2000 MHz) Pentium 4 1.4 GHz (1400 MHz) |
| Motherboard and Memory | Asus P4T533-C (Intel 850E Chipset) Revision: 1.01 Bios: 1006 BETA 002 (07.08.2002) 2x 256 MB RDRAM, PC800, 533 MHz, 40ns, Infinion 2x 256 MB RDRAM, PC1066, 533 MHz, 32ns, Kingstone |
| Driver | Intel 850E Driver V 4.00.1013 (7.06.2002) Intel IAA Driver V 2.2.0.2126 |
| AMD Hardware (Socket 462) | |
| Processors 133 MHz FSB 166 MHz Memory Clock |
Athlon XP 2600+ (2133 MHz) Athlon XP 2200+ (1800 MHz) Athlon XP 2100+ (1733 MHz) Athlon XP 2000+ (1666 MHz) Athlon XP 1900+ (1600 MHz) Athlon XP 1800+ (1533 MHz) Athlon XP 1700+ (1466 MHz) Athlon XP 1600+ (1400 MHz) Athlon XP 1500+ (1333 MHz) Athlon 1400 (1400 MHz) |
| Processors 100 MHz FSB 133 MHz Memory Clock |
Athlon 850 (850/100/133 MHz) |
| Motherboard and Memory | Epox EP-8K3A+ (VIA Apollo KT333 Chipset) Revision: 1.0 Bios: 8k3a2328 (19.06.2002) 512 MB DDR-SDRAM, CL2.0, 166 MHz, PC2700, Winbond |
| Drivers | VIA KT333 Driver 4 in 1 Version: 4.40(a)P3 INF File Version: 1.60a AGP Driver Version: 4.20a IDE Filter driver Version: 1.20 |
| Common Hardware | |
| Graphics Card | GeForce 4 Ti 4600 (MSI MS-8872) Version: 2.00 Memory: 128 MB DDR-SDRAM Memory Clock: 650 MHz Chip Clock: 300 MHz |
| Hard Drive | 40 GB,6L040J2 , Maxtor UDMA100, 7200 U/min, 2 MB Cache |
| Network | D-Link DFE-530TX (10/100 Mbit) |
| CDROM | Asus 52x |
| Drivers and Software | |
| Graphics Driver | Detonator 4 Serie Version: 29.42 |
| DirectX | Version: 8.1 |
| OS | Windows XP, Build 2600 |
| Benchmarks and Settings | |
| Bapco Sysmark 2002 | Version 1.0 |
| Quake III Arena | Patch V1.16 640×480 – 16 bit / 1024 x 768 – 32 bit Timedemo1 / demo demo001 / nv15demo command line = +set cd_nocd 1 +set s_initsound 0 command line = +set cd_nocd 1 +set s_initsound 0 Graphics detail = Normal |
| 3DMark 2000 Pro | Version 1.1 Build 340 1024 x 786 – 16 bit Default Benchmark |
| 3DMark 2001 SE | Version 1.1 Build 340 Patch Build 330 1024 x 786 – 32 bit Default Benchmark |
| PCMark 2002 Pro Pack | Build 100 CPU and Memory Tests |
| SiSoftware Sandra Standard 2002 SP1 | Version 2002.6.8.97 CPU Multi-Media- / CPU Arithmetic- / Memory Bandwidth- Benchmark |
| Newtek Lightwave | Version 7.5 – Build 572 Render First Frame = 1 Render Last Frame = 60 Render Frame Step = 1 Rendering Bench “SKULL_HEAD_NEWEST.LWS” Show Rendering in Progress = 320×240 Ray Trace Shadows, Reflection, Refraction, Transparency = on Multithreading = 8 Threads |
| DivX Pro | Version 5.0.02 Xmpeg – Version 4.5 150 MB VOB Datei, 3780 Frames, 720 x 480 pixel, 25 fps Audio = off, Crop = on, Video Format = YV12 Performance/quality = Slowest, Encoding bitrate = 780 kbps |
| Pinnacle Studio 7 | Version 7.13.5 Rendering – DVD Compatible no Audio |
| Lame | Version 3.92 32 bit DOS Prompt, 178 MB Wave file, 44100 Hz 32 – 320 Kbit sampling |
| e-merge Winace | Version 2.2 178 MB Wave file, Compression = Best, Dictonary = 4096 KB |
| Maxon Computer | Cinema 4D XL 7- Version 7.303 Rendering in 1024 x 786, “Radiosity-Stairs.c4d” |
| magix mp3 maker platinum | Version 3.04 D 178 MB Wave file, 44100 Hz, VBR = on and quality |
| SPEC Viewperf | Version 7.0 1280 x 1024 / 32 bit / 85 Hz, Vsync = off |
| Comanche 4 | 1024 x 768 / 32 bit / Audio = off |
| discreet | 3ds Max 4.2 4.26 Service Pack 1 Characters “Dragon_Charater_rig” Rendering Single, 1024×768 |
Benchmarks under Windows XP
| OpenGL Performance | Quake 3 Arena “Demo 1” and “NV15 Demo” |
| 3D Rendering | SPECviewperf 7 (new) Lightwave 7.5 Build 572 Cinema 4D XL 7.303 3D Studio Max 4.2 SP1 |
| DirectX7 Games | 3D Mark 2000 Pro (ver. 1.1) |
| DirectX8 Games | 3D Mark 2001 SE (ver. 1.1) Comanche 4 (new) |
| MP3 Audio Encoding | Lame MP3 Encoder 3.92 mp3 Maker Platinum 3.04 |
| MPEG-2 Video Encoding | Pinnacle Studio 7.3.15 |
| MPEG-4 Video Encoding | XFlask 4.5 and Divx 5.02 Pro |
| Office Performance | Sysmark 2002 |
| Archiving | WinACE 2.2 |
| CPU und Multimedia Bench | PC Mark 2002 SiSoft Sandra 2002 Pro SP1 |
We use different benchmark tests in order to give you a complete and balanced picture of what the new P4/2800 can do. The benchmark results from a total of 35 different CPUs provide a general overview. As a comparison, all AMD Athlon XP processors, the classic Athlon with the Thunderbird core, and the slowest Athlon 850 are also included.
The OpenGL performances are evaluated using various Quake 3 tests – the Direct3D performance from the DirectX package is measured with 3D Mark 2000 (based on DirectX7) and 3D Mark 2001 (based on DirectX 8). A relative newcomer is the first game with DirectX 8 support: Comanche 4.
A comprehensive test scenario is created by a variety of benchmarks for MPEG encoding – with the help of the Lame MP3 Encoder, a 178 MB WAV file is converted to the MPEG-1 Layer 3 format. One of the established standards is our MPEG-4 test, in which data from a commercial DVD-ROM is converted into MPEG-4 via Xmpeg 4.5 and the codec DivX 5.02 Pro. In addition, an MPEG-2 file is created with the video editing software Pinnacle Studio 7.
Part of our standard repertoire is the professional Lightwave package version 7b from Newtek, used to evaluate rendering performance. Also important for practical applications is data-packing, for which we use WinACE-Packer 2.11.
In order to test office performance, the Sysmark 2001 benchmark is used. A comprehensive 3D benchmark suite is provided by the new SPEC Viewperf 7. And last but not least, SiSoft Sandra 2002 Pro should be mentioned.
The new versions of 3D Studio Max 5.0 and Pinnacle Studio 8.1 arrived at our lab too late, so we were unable to include them in the test.
OpenGL-Performance: Quake 3 Arena
In the four time-demo runs from Quake 3 Arena, the results are consistent: the Athlon XP 2600+ cannot keep up with the P4/2800. The reason for this is that the AMD platform lacks the memory bandwidth, causing all Athlon CPUs to end up in the lower ranks.
DirectX 7 Games: 3D Mark 2000
3D Mark 2000 shows the Direct3D performance of DirectX 7 under Windows XP. The tradition has been broken: the Pentium 4/2800 soars above the fastest AMD Athlon XP 2600+ by 325 points. The absolute leader here is the overclocked Intel P4/3100.
DirectX 8 Games: 3D Mark 2001 SE
3D Mark 2000 shows the Direct3D performance of DirectX 8 under Windows XP. In this test, the Athlon XP 2600+ falls behind the Pentium 4/2800 by 1000 points.
DirectX 8 Hardcore Game: Comanche 4
Comanche 4 is one of the first games on the market to support DirectX 8. With its high clock speed, the Athlon XP 2600+ can basically gain ground and reach the performance of a Pentium 4/2533 with PC800. However, the P4/2800 leads the pack with 58 fps. When older processors are used, such as the Athlon 850, the game can hardly be played.
MP3-Audio-Encoding: Lame MP3
With the Lame MP3 Encoder, a 178 MB sound file in WAV format is converted to MPEG-1 Layer 3 format under Windows XP. The graphic shows that the AMD Athlon XP 2600+ is only two seconds behind the P4/2800 MHz.
MP3-Audio-Encoding: MP3 Maker Platinium
Video-Encoding MPEG-4: Xmpeg 4.5 und Divx 5.02 Pro
Memory performance is an important factor for MPEG-4 encoding. In this category, the AMD Athlon XP 2600+, combined with DDR333 (CL 2 – max. timing), is unable to keep up with the Pentium 4/2800. The Athlon 850 simply shows its age with about 16 fps, as does the Athlon 1400 with 26 fps, because it lacks the SSE codes.
Video-Encoding MPEG-2: Pinnacle Studio 7
In encoding an MPEG-2 video with Pinnacle Studio 7, the P4/2800 does the job in 61 seconds, which is about nine seconds faster than the Athlon XP 2600+. When extremely overclocked, the Intel Pentium 4/2800, despite its Rambus speed (PC1200), must admit defeat to the Athlon XP 3400+. The AMD CPU renders the video in 58.8 seconds. The slowest candidate is the AMD Athlon 850, which we’ve included as a comparison – it is slower than the Athlon XP 3000+ by more than three minutes, which is enough time for you to have a cup of coffee!
SiSoft Sandra 2002 Benchmarks: CPU und Multimedia
In the SiSoft Sandra CPU Benchmark 2002, the Athlon XP 2600+ achieves nearly the same results as the P4/2800 in some of the tests. It’s clear to see that the benchmark does not represent realistic performance values. Many users get their hopes up too high when comparing their own results.
Multimedia Performance: PC Mark 2002
In both of the benchmark tests, the P4/2800 is ahead of the AMD Athlon XP 2600+. The reason for this positioning is that this benchmark is based on old programming code, which does not have optimizations for AMD and Intel.
Office-/Internet-Performance: Sysmark 2002
In all three parts, the Athlon XP 2600+ lands only in mid-field, achieving the performance level of a Pentium 4/2000 with the Northwood core. Even a high clock speed for the Athlon XP does not help.
Archiving: WinACE 2.2
Archiving data is a very practical application. With the help of the new WinACE 2.11 packer under Windows XP, a 178 MB WAV file was packed while the clock was running. Here, the Athlon XP 2600+ clearly lags behind the Pentium 4/2800, and there’s about a 30-second difference between the two! This benchmark is very dependent on the performance of the memory interface, therefore the test scores for the overclocked Athlon CPUs (XP 3000+ and XP 3400+) are quite low. The reason for this is that, at high memory clock rates, the motherboard switches over to the slower CL3 mode. Here, it is not possible to manually set it to CL2.0.
3D-Rendering: Newtek Lightwave 7.5
In the Lightwave benchmark, the optimizations for the Pentium 4 processors become particularly noticeable – the Athlon XP 2600+ lands mid-field. Even high clock speeds of up to 2666 MHz don’t help.
3D-Rendering: Cinema 4D XL 7.303
The AMD Athlon gets agressive in the Cinema benchmark: here, the AMD Athlon XP 2600+ takes first place and puts the P4/2800 in its place. In any case, there’s a difference of nine seconds. This is the only benchmark where the Athlon XP 2600+ manages to beat the fastest P4.
3D-Rendering: 3D Studio Max 4.26
In this benchmark, ten frames from the “Rabbit” scene are calculated at 800 x 600. Ever since the software manufacturer came out with Service Pack 1, which they optimized in cooperation with Intel, it doesn’t look very good for the Athlon XP 2600+. The P4/2800 has a 28-second advantage. It’s only thanks to the extremely high clock speed of 2666 MHz that the Athlon XP 3400+ is able to achieve nearly the same results as the Pentium 4/2800.
3D-Rendering Performance: SPEC Viewperf 7
The SPEC benchmark reveals varying results: in the DRV8, DX07 and PROE01 tests, breakdowns occurred because these tests are code-intensive. The Pentium 4/2800 and Athlon XP 2600+ alternated for the lead position.
Outlook: QDI 845PE Motherboard
Die of the 845PE chipset (northbridge)
QDI Platinix 2E-333 with Intel 845PE chipset
Memory Wars: DDR333 vs. Rambus
The graphic shows that the Intel platform, together with Rambus memory and the higher FSB of the P4 CPU, attains a higher memory performance.
Conclusion: Change In Power
AMD’s triumph took us all by surprise, and it didn’t last long. In any case, the Athlon XP 2600+ could outperform the Intel P4/2533 in numerous benchmark tests. Now, Intel sends its P4/2800 into the fray. In this situation, the AMD processor takes the lead in only one of the benchmark disciplines, namely, 3D rendering under Cinema 4D XL R7. In all other categories with different applications, the P4 tops the Athlon XP.
Once again, Intel wages war on AMD, fighting to attain the fastest desktop CPU. AMD is sure to launch the Athlon XP 2800+ soon (in October at the latest), so that it will be able to keep close on the heels of its arch-rival. Intel has also made preparations of its own, with the P4/3066 up its sleeve.
At any rate, the real winner is the ambitious end user, who will be able to choose between the P4/3066 and the Athlon XP 3000+ by the time Christmas rolls around. Both the successor to the P4 and the AMD Hammer won’t be available until next year.
As always, price-conscious buyers who are interested in getting the best price/ performance ratio are a bit better off with an AMD Athlon XP than with a P4..
