FX-57 @ 3.6Ghz vs. Conroe @ 2.66Ghz vs. X2 4400+ @ 2.66Ghz: PCMark05 CPU Suite

[freecableguy]

freecableguy ***xtremesystems.org exclusive information***

Benchmark: PCMark05 CPU Suite
AMD FX-57 @ 3.6Ghz vs. Intel "Conroe" ES @ 2.66Ghz vs. AMD X2 4400+ @ 2.66Ghz

CPU: AMD 0516 FX-57 @ 3.6Ghz (257x14) @ 1.7v
Memory: 2x512MB PC-3200 Mushkin BH-5 @ 2-2-2-5, 257Mhz 1:1
Motherboard: DFI LanParty Venus NF4 SLI-DR
Cooling: Custom 'Chilly1' single-stage autocascade
CPU Temps: -30C idle, -15C full load while benching
OS: WinXP Pro SP2

File Compression: 13.889 MB/s
File Decompression: 212.599 MB/s
File Encyption: 74.068 MB/s
File Decryption: 61.977 MB/s
Image Decompression: 41.232 MPixels/s
Audio Compression: 4072.237 KB/s

Multithreaded Test 1 *
File Compression: 7.246 MB/s
File Encryption: 37.099 MB/s

Multithreaded Test 2 *
File Decompression: 53.841 MB/s
File Decryption: 15.823 MB/s
Audio Decompression: 797.756 KB/s
Image Decompression: 10.534 MPixels/s

* denotes multithreaded benchmark running on a single core CPU

FX-57 @ 3.6Ghz score: 5215 (compared to Conroe: -23%)




CPU: Intel "Conroe" 2.13Ghz ES @ 2.66Ghz (333x8) @ 1.15v
Memory: 2x512MB PC2-4200 Mushkin @ 3-2-2-4, 333Mhz 1:1
Motherboard: Intel D975XBX "Bad Axe"
Cooling: Stock Intel aluminum heatsink, ambient ~22C
CPU Temps: 35C idle, 41C full load while benching (according to EVEREST)
OS: WinXP Pro SP2

***NOTE: Score "+%" are compared to AMD X2 4400+ @ 2.66Ghz (DC vs. DC)

File Compression: 11.871 MB/s (+20.5%)
File Decompression: 176.380 MB/s (+12%)
File Encyption: 73.726 MB/s (+27%)
File Decryption: 73.704 MB/s (+39%)
Image Decompression: 36.244 MPixels/s (+19%)
Audio Compression: 3403.169 KB/s (+12.8%)

Multithreaded Test 1
File Compression: 11.854 MB/s (+18.6%)
File Encryption: 73.337 MB/s (+27%)

Multithreaded Test 2
File Decompression: 88.192 MB/s (+14.2%)
File Decryption: 37.055 MB/s (+40%)
Audio Decompression: 1366.343 KB/s (+17.3%)
Image Decompression: 18.134 MPixels/s (+17.2%)

Conroe @ 2.66Ghz score: 6761 (increase over X2 4400+: +22.5%)




CPU: AMD X2 4400+ @ 2.66Ghz (242x11) @ 1.64v
Memory: 2x1GB PC-4000 OCZ UCCC @ 3-4-3-7, 242Mhz 1:1
Motherboard: DFI LanParty NF4 SLI-DR
Cooling: Water cooling, ambient ~20C
CPU Temps: 38C full load while benching
OS: WinXP Pro SP2

File Compression: 9.457 MB/s (-20.5%)
File Decompression: 155.303 MB/s (-12%)
File Encyption: 53.860 MB/s (-27%)
File Decryption: 45.153 MB/s (-39%)
Image Decompression: 29.364 MPixels/s (-19%)
Audio Compression: 2969.621 KB/s (-12.8%)

Multithreaded Test 1
File Compression: 9.656 MB/s (-18.6%)
File Encryption: 53.557 MB/s (-27%)

Multithreaded Test 2
File Decompression: 75.682 MB/s (-14.2%)
File Decryption: 22.423 MB/s (-40%)
Audio Decompression: 1128.614 KB/s (-17.3%)
Image Decompression: 15.029 MPixels/s (-17.2%)

4400+ @ 2.66Ghz score: 5240 (compared to Conroe: -22.5%)



Quick Conclusion(s): An AMD single core @ 3.6Ghz is approximately equivalent to an AMD dual core @ 2.66Ghz. (Shows the real power of slower DC systems compared to "faster" single core benchmarking systems. My, how things have changed....). More importantly, Intel Conroe is showing an increase in performance over AMD X2/DC Opteron CPUs in the range of 12 to 40% with an average increase of ~23%.


-FCG xs.org

*** Special thanks to Vapor for contributing AMD X2 scores

[G H Z]

Definately better with the 4400 added, nice comparo

[death metal]

Nice comparison, great benching results, thanks for taking the time to do all that stuff (and thanks to the guys who supported you at this venture as well)!

[dogsx2]

Great work. Nice to see a X2 in the mix. Thanks Vapor for the ss. Nothing like great results to make the work worth the effort.

[KiD0M4N]

nice benches.... am downloading pcmark05 to give it a try on my machine.....

[StyM]

great benchies.. oh well, it looks like its going to be a walk in the park for intel this time...

[iboomalot]

could you rerun the 4400+ test if possible with some decent speed and timings to see how that effects the score??


3-4-3 timings at a slow 242 will hurt the 4400+

[tdenton1138]

Thanks for the great work, FCG! We all appreciate the benches.

Please, someone sell me a rev 304 board!

[KiD0M4N]

well I downloaded PCm05 and ran the CPU tests:



conroe definitely scores a lot more in PC05.

@Fugger: I had used a clearly watermarked image (freecableguy and xs clearly mentioned.) it wasnt stealing was it?

[Your_Boss]

I think my lunch just came back up.

Oh man, you removed the photo. LOL That's good, I didn't really want to keep seeing that thing as I scroll up and down the page.

BTW, Great work FUGGER! Can we see Oblivion? Thanks.

[iboomalot]

well I downloaded PCm05 and ran the CPU tests:



conroe definitely scores a lot more in PC05.

@Fugger: I had used a clearly watermarked image (freecableguy and xs clearly mentioned.) it wasnt stealing was it?

I did too and we are within 1 pt LOL

[madgamer]

after all these conroe vs. otherstuff threads i'm totally sold. This cpu cant come out soon enough. great benches.

[KiD0M4N]

I did too and we are within 1 pt LOL

hmm trcd = 3 and trp = 2

[iboomalot]

After some further testing I feel depending on the test / use of your CPU the Conroe compared to a X2-939 as follows

2.4 conroe = 2.5ghz - 2.7ghz X2
2.66 conroe = 2.9-3.1 ghz X2

Very impressive


PS conroe at 3ghz + is going to be a monster if it can do that on air

[friedchips]

The conroe is looking very promising

[Ron 61]

Thanks for all your work FCG. As if you don't already have enough request, I would like to see conroe with the 3D06 CPU slide show.

[Ron 61]

Thanks for all your work FCG. As if you don't already have enough request, I would like to see conroe with the 3D06 CPU slide show.

[adeoliver]

Very nice indeed. That is quite a large gap between those scores. Cant wait to have 1 of my own.

[Durzel]

Awesome results.

Thanks a lot for all of the effort you have all clearly put into this.

[iterations]

Yeah. The effort, thorough presentation of information, and excellent formatting is very much appeciated. Nice work FCG!

[EnJoY]

Just another nail in the coffen some may say. But really, people keep forgetting that we're comparing future technology to present, soon to be past, technology. It has to be taken with a grain of salt in terms of brand opinions.

In regards to the tests themselves, it's amazing to see how crippled single cores are becoming. Very fascinating comparison between dual-core and single-core here for sure.

[iterations]

Just another nail in the coffen some may say. But really, people keep forgetting that we're comparing future technology to present, soon to be past, technology. It has to be taken with a grain of salt in terms of brand opinions.

In regards to the tests themselves, it's amazing to see how crippled single cores are becoming. Very fascinating comparison between dual-core and single-core here for sure.

True, but do you really have any better suggestions for what to compare it to? The AM2 parts aren't any better than the existing stuff, so this seems like the most appropriate comparison available.

I agree, dual core is really showing it's strength.

[EnJoY]

True, but do you really have any better suggestions for what to compare it to? The AM2 parts aren't any better than the existing stuff, so this seems like the most appropriate comparison available.

I agree, dual core is really showing it's strength.

I'm not suggesting we compare it to anything else, as there isn't anything else. I'm just making a note on how I feel we should look at it.

[i found nemo]

here's a single core @ 2.6, if any one cares ... could not get it to run the other tests i seen here

[georgekh]

well looks like conroe has raised the bar so we'll have to see is amd comes up with something better (which i hope they wont)