AMD Athlon 64 4000+ & FX-55: A Thorough Investigation
by Anand Lal Shimpi on October 19, 2004 1:04 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Re-evaluating the Benefits of Socket-939
Given that pretty much the fastest processors are available on both Socket-754 and Socket-939 platforms for the Athlon 64, we have to once again look at the performance improvement brought by a 128-bit memory interface to see if Socket-939 is truly worth it from an overall performance standpoint. Understanding that the upgrade path is much brighter with Socket-939, it is still important to evaluate present-day performance benefits. So, is Socket-939 worth it from a broad standpoint? In order to find out we compared two identical processors: the Athlon 64 3800+ and the Athlon 64 3400+. Both run at the same 2.4GHz clock speed and feature the same 512KB L2 cache, the only difference is that one processor has a 128-bit memory interface while the other has a 64-bit memory interface. Let the games begin:
In our Business/General Use tests, the 128-bit memory interface of the 3800+ was responsible for an average of a 5.4% performance advantage over the Socket-754 part, only tying in one benchmark.
In our Multitasking Content Creation tests, the Socket-939 platform pulled ahead in all tests by an average of 3.2%.
In the Video Creation/Photo Editing tests, the Socket-939 platform pulled ahead, once again, in all tests by an average of 4.2%.
The Socket-939 platform pulled ahead by an average of 4.4% in four out of the 5 A/V encoding tests.
In the gaming tests, the 128-bit Socket-939 memory interface caused an average performance advantage of 6.3% across all tests.
Surprisingly enough, in the 3D Rendering tests with 3dsmax, Socket-939 offers a 5.4% performance advantage - once again, across all tests.
Finally in our Workstation tests we find the biggest supporter for Socket-939, the platform allows for an average improvement over over 17%.
From our standpoint, the recommendation for Socket-939 is clear, although rest assured that if you are on a budget you can get away with Socket-939-like performance with a Socket-754 platform in certain performance categories. Although workstation users will definitely want to spring for the 939 platforms, and with the introduction of the new 90nm Socket-939 parts, the platform should become even more affordable. It's worth going down one speed grade in order to get a Socket-939 platform in our opinion, not only for the small to reasonable performance improvements but also because of the much safer upgrade path.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
89 Comments
View All Comments
skiboysteve - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
On the Business winstone 2004..."The Pentium 4 550 and Athlon 64 3800+ tie in the middle, while the 3400+ offers statistically similar performance."
No they didnt.
microAmp - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Very nice article, loved the L2 cache and memory comparisons at the end.thermalpaste - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Way back in 2000, I felt that Intel was doing something stupid by introducing the Willamette.The thunderbird was faster than the p-III coppermine at the same clock speeds, but considering that the p-III just had 2 parallel FPUs compared to the 3 on the athlon. An additional FPU would have helped of course. though the P-III core was not able to sustain higher clock speeds , intel could have redesigned a marginally deeper pipeline on the same core rather than designing the pentium-4 with a mammoth 20 stage pipeline.
Now the prescotts come with a 30-odd stage pipeline, but the integer unit runs at twice the speed which doesn't make the 7th generation of processors from intel very 'scalable'. Besides the processor heats upto 70 odd degrees with consummate ease (Im staying in India where the avg. room temperature is something like 29 degrees Celsius) and is not overclocker friendly.
I am waiting for the newer chips from Intel, based on the Pentium-M a.k.a the P6 architecture.
AMD is way ahead of Intel as of now.
skiboysteve - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Athlon 64 4000+ - 2.4GHz - 1MB - 128-bitAthlon 64 3800+ - 2.4GHz - 512KB - 128-bit
Athlon 64 3400+ - 2.4GHz - 1MB - 64-bit
Athlon 64 3400+ - 2.4GHz - 512KB - 64-bit
Athlon 64 FX-53 - 2.4GHz - 1MB - 128-bit
these numbers look off.
Your saying there are two s754 3400+, and one has more cache?
eva2000 - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
why leave out the 3700+ s754 1MB from suhc a nice comparison :)miketheidiot - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
excellent article. I agree with #2 that I would have liked to see an overclocking comparison, or at least a quick demonstation of the 4000 and fx-55. Still a great article though.GhandiInstinct - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
We can always marvel at them but the prices, realistcaly speaking is a waste of our time. I'm as interested in the FX-55 as much as the IBM super-computer blue.Zac42 - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
I especially liked the comparrison of the equally priced value procs at the end of the article. Nice way to sum up the graphs. Good overall comparison, as you guys have just about any possible app one could use on a PC. Now we just need an OC comparrison, and we will be set!DrMrLordX - Tuesday, October 19, 2004 - link
Nice article so far, still reading it, but I would like to know where the 925XE chipset-based P4 board was in this review? Are those available to you guys yet? Just wondering.