Intel Pentium 4 6xx and 3.73EE: Favoring Features Over Performance
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on February 21, 2005 6:15 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
The Test
Our hardware configurations are similar to what we've used in previous comparisons.
AMD Athlon 64 Configuration
Socket-939 Athlon 64 CPUs
2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 EL Dual Channel DIMMs 2-2-2-10
NVIDIA nForce4 Reference Motherboard
ATI Radeon X800 XT PCI Express
Intel Pentium 4 Configuration
LGA-775 Intel Pentium 4 and Extreme Edition CPUs
2 x 512MB Crucial DDR-II 533 Dual Channel DIMMs 3-3-3-12
Intel 925XE Motherboard
ATI Radeon X800 XT PCI Express
Business/General Use Performance
Business Winstone 2004
Business Winstone 2004 tests the following applications in various usage scenarios:
. Microsoft Access 2002
. Microsoft Excel 2002
. Microsoft FrontPage 2002
. Microsoft Outlook 2002
. Microsoft PowerPoint 2002
. Microsoft Project 2002
. Microsoft Word 2002
. Norton AntiVirus Professional Edition 2003
. WinZip 8.1
Office Productivity SYSMark 2004
SYSMark's Office Productivity suite consists of three tests, the first of which is the Communication test. The Communication test consists of the following:
"The user receives an email in Outlook 2002 that contains a collection of documents in a zip file. The user reviews his email and updates his calendar while VirusScan 7.0 scans the system. The corporate web site is viewed in Internet Explorer 6.0. Finally, Internet Explorer is used to look at samples of the web pages and documents created during the scenario."
The next test is Document Creation performance, which shows very little difference in drive performance between the contenders:
"The user edits the document using Word 2002. He transcribes an audio file into a document using Dragon NaturallySpeaking 6. Once the document has all the necessary pieces in place, the user changes it into a portable format for easy and secure distribution using Acrobat 5.0.5. The user creates a marketing presentation in PowerPoint 2002 and adds elements to a slide show template."
The final test in our Office Productivity suite is Data Analysis, which BAPCo describes as:
"The user opens a database using Access 2002 and runs some queries. A collection of documents are archived using WinZip 8.1. The queries' results are imported into a spreadsheet using Excel 2002 and are used to generate graphical charts."
Microsoft Office XP SP-2
Here we see in that the purest of office application tests, performance doesn't vary all too much.
Mozilla 1.4
Quite possibly the most frequently used application on any desktop is the one we pay the least amount of attention to when it comes to performance. While a bit older than the core that is now used in Firefox, performance in Mozilla is worth looking at as many users are switching from IE to a much more capable browser on the PC - Firefox.
ACD Systems ACDSee PowerPack 5.0
ACDSee is a popular image editing tool that is great for basic image editing options such as batch resizing, rotating, cropping and other such features that are too elementary to justify purchasing something as powerful as Photoshop for. There are no extremely complex filters here, just pure batch image processing.
Ahead Software Nero Express 6.0.0.3
While it was a major issue in the past, these days buffer underrun errors while burning a CD or DVD are few and far between thanks to high performance CPUs as well as vastly improved optical drives. When you take the optical drive out of the equation, how do these CPU's stack up with burning performance?
As you'd guess, they're all pretty much the same, with the slight variations between chips falling within expectations. Any of these chips will do just fine.
Winzip
Archiving performance ends up being fairly CPU bound as well as I/O limited.
WinRAR 3.40
Pulling the hard disk out of the equation we can get a much better idea of which processors are truly best suited for file compression.
71 Comments
View All Comments
DerekWilson - Monday, February 21, 2005 - link
I noticed a comment about our power numbers showing the 6xx series drawing more at load than the 5xx series ...This may be due to the fact that we ran our LOAD power test without EIST and the IDLE power was measured with EIST to get close to the min and max numbers.
Our AMD parts, however, were measured at min and max without powernow! ... so the AMD parts have the potential to post numbers even lower.
danidentity - Monday, February 21, 2005 - link
#48 - Power consumption is not going to change depending on whether you're running 64-bit apps or not.Live - Monday, February 21, 2005 - link
Nice and clean review. Good work. Tough it is not really what you want to read when the biggest CPU maker in the world releases a whole new series. Boring and utterly disappointing.Viditor - Monday, February 21, 2005 - link
Nice job AT! I appreciate very much the power consumption numbers!Request:
When we do finally get 64bit benches, I would very much like to see the power consumption figures under 64bit...
Viditor - Monday, February 21, 2005 - link
neogodless - "I would like to see more "multi-tasking" benchmarks"If it makes you feel better, many of the benches used are designed for hyperthreading...
Zebo - Monday, February 21, 2005 - link
A pig with a bowtie is still a pig. This was an arse whippin by AMD.bobsmith1492 - Monday, February 21, 2005 - link
44 - ???My XP 2.4 runs MMJB, UD Agent, about 10 IE and Mozilla windows, Word, Excel, and Paint, with a game minimized in the background, while chatting with several people on Trillian smooth as silk.
neogodless - Monday, February 21, 2005 - link
Every time I see AMD vs Intel benchmarks, I think it's great that I have an AMD at home. But then I remember how much I like using my Intel at work. The reason I bring this is up is because I would like to see more "multi-tasking" benchmarks, like running these same benchmarks with programs running the background, such as Outlook/Thunderbird, AIM/GAIM/Trillian, MusicMatch/WinAmp, and so forth.Houdani - Monday, February 21, 2005 - link
In Soviet Russia, benches mark YOU!Billy Idol - Monday, February 21, 2005 - link