<!–#set var="article_header" value="AMD Travels Through Time:
Athlon XP 2800+ with Dual-DDR” –>
The Future is Now: the Athlon XP 2800+ Is Here!
The time is January 6, 2003. The location: a busy street full of computer specialty stores. You run over to the nearest one. You shell out a thousand bucks to buy the very latest and best. You take a look at your purchases: an AMD Athlon XP 2800+ and an Nvidia nForce 2 mobo for Dual DDR 400. Well, guess what? The future is now. It’s here, and we have a taste of it.
The Athlon XP 2800+ with 166 MHz FSB in action.
This little scenario illustrates the situation of the Athlon XP 2800+. AMD sent us two processors, the Athlon XP 2800+ and 2700+, both of which run with an FSB clock of 166 MHz. The XP 2700+ is based on a clock speed of 2166 MHz (13.0 x 166 MHz), and the XP 2800+ on 2250 MHz (13.5 x 166 MHz). Furthermore, the test components consisted of an ATI Radeon 9700 Pro graphics card and a motherboard with Nvidia’s nForce 2 chipset (Asus A7N8X).
Details on the Athlon XP 2800+/2700+
The top model for January 2003: Athlon XP 2800+.
Details about the AMD Athlon XP 2800+.
After considerable discussions and simulations, AMD has finally made it: the FSB clock of 166 MHz has become reality. The chip manufacturer can now offer processors exclusively for the new clock speed, starting with the Athlon XP 2700+. Compared to its predecessor with 133 MHz FSB, the clock speed and bandwidth of the new processor are increased by almost 20%. This gives you 2.6 GB/s (166 MHz x 64 Bit x 2 flanks = 2.6 GB/s), as opposed to 2.1 GB/s.
| CPU core | Thoroughbred “B” | Thoroughbred “A” | Palomino |
| Wafer Surface | 31416 mm² | 31416 mm² | 31416 mm² |
| Die Surface | 84 mm² | 80 mm² | 128 mm² |
| Circuit Path Density | 0.13 µm | 0.13 µm | 0.18 µm |
| Waste (approx.) | 18% | 18% | 18% |
| Yield | 306 pieces/wafer | 322 pieces/wafer | 201 pieces/wafer |
Basically, the two new processors look like the other two CPUs with the Thoroughbred B core. The die surface is still 84 mm², ensuring effective heat transfer between CPU and cooler. For cost reasons, AMD does without a heat spreader. With a core voltage of 1.65 Volt and a clock speed of 2250 MHz (Athlon XP 2800+), the maximal thermal dissipation is 75.3 Watt, while that of the Athlon XP 2700+ (2166 MHz) is 68.3 Watt.
There’s no change in the maximum temperature, which is still 85 degrees Celsius. The sample processor does reveal some special aspects, however: for all of the CPUs with the Thoroughbred B core (from Athlon XP 2400+ up to XP 2800+), the thermal diode doesn’t work. This means that when there’s a cooler defect, the motherboard will not be able to protect the CPU. A correct measurement of the die temperature is not possible.
| Intel | AMD | Availability |
| P4 3.33 GHz | ||
| Athlon XP 3000+ | ||
| P4 3.06 GHz (Hyperthr.) | from November 2002 | |
| Athlon XP 2800+ (41 days) |
from January 2003 | |
| P4 2.8 GHz (112 days) |
yes | |
| Athlon XP 2600+ (72 days) |
from October 2002 | |
| Athlon XP 2200+ (0.13 µm) (89 days) |
yes | |
| P4 2.53 GHz (34 days) |
yes | |
| P4 2.4 GHz (85 days) |
yes | |
| Athlon XP 2100+ (65 days) |
yes | |
| P4 2.2 GHz (0.13µm) (133 days) |
Athlon XP 2000+ (63 days) |
yes |
| Athlon XP 1900+ (27 days) |
yes | |
| Athlon XP 1800+ (97 days) |
yes | |
| P4 2.0 GHz (89 days) |
production stopped | |
| Athlon 1400 (104 days) |
production stopped | |
| P4 1.7 GHz (190 days) |
production stopped | |
| Athlon 1333 (155 days) |
production stopped | |
| P4 1.5 GHz (0.18 µm) | production stopped | |
| Athlon 1200 (135 days) |
production stopped | |
| Athlon 1000 (0.18 µm) | production stopped |
Comparison: Heat Dissipation of all AMD Athlon CPUs
The following graphic lists the thermal dissipation of all Athlon CPUs starting from 1300 MHz, from the Athlon with the Thunderbird core, to the Palomino, up through the two Thoroughbred “A” and “B” cores. Apparently, switching over to the 0.13-micron technique only briefly puts a damper on the rise in thermal power loss. As opposed to the earlier assumptions from AMD, the record value for the thermal power loss has risen to new heights: 74.3 Watt with the Athlon XP 2800+. This surpasses that old power station block in ceramic casing, the Athlon 1400 with 73.5 Watt.
Bingo! Synchronous Operation with 166 MHz FSB
Synchronous mode is available: 166 MHz FSB with the Asus A7N8X and the nForce 2 chipset.
AMD hit the jackpot with its increased FSB clock speed of 166 MHz. Up to now, the Front Side Bus ran at 133 MHz (double data rate) between the Athlon CPU and the Northbridge of the chipset, achieving a bandwidth of 2.1 GB/s. Together with DDR266 memory (VIA KT266 and VIA KT266A), the RAM also reached a bandwidth of 2.1 GB/s at a clock speed of 133 MHz. Here, both of the buses work synchronously and are optimally tuned to one another.
Following this, there was a change in the RAM: modules with DDR333 now ran with 166 MHz and offered a bandwidth of 2.6 GB/s. The appropriate chipsets came from VIA (KT333 and KT400) and had to make do with asynchronous operation, since the Athlon XP at the time could still only run with 133 MHz FSB. Note that VIA’s KT333 with 166 MHz FSB support was already launched on February 20, 2002 (DDR333 For Athlon: VIA KT333 vs. KT266A).
Bingo! Synchronous Operation with 166 MHz FSB, Continued
Because the two buses (FSB and memory) ran asynchronously, even DDR333 memory with CL2.0 could not achieve optimal performance. Now, eight months after the introduction of the VIA KT333, it is finally possible to clock the CPU and RAM synchronously and attain maximum system performance.
The next step in the evolution has already been determined: boards for DDR 400 (KT400) that work with 200 MHz memory clock can only communicate asynchronously with the newest Athlon XP processors. So, a further increase in FSB clock speed is planned.
The reference board from Nvidia with the nForce 2 chipset. During the test, it did not run error-free.
Northbridge of the nForce 2 chipset.
Southbridge of the nForce 2 chipset.
Ultimately, there’s still some distance between the Athlon XP and its arch rival, the Intel Pentium 4: the latter offers a bandwidth of 4.2 GB/s at an FSB clock of 133 MHz – together with RDRAM PC1066 (533 MHz), synchronous operation is possible (4.2 GB/s).
Details on the Test Boards
Beta sample with the nForce 2 chipset: the Asus A7N8X.
Dual-Channel DDR400: Asus A7N8X with Corsair memory modules.
On-board Serial ATA.
For this test, AMD gave us the Asus A7N8X, which is equipped with the nForce 2 chipset. Included with the package was an ATI Radeon 9700 Pro reference card, as well as two DDR400 memory modules from Corsair (512 MB with PC3200). At the same time, Nvidia sent in a reference board with the same chipset, although during testing, this proved to have some deficiencies. The stepping of the Northbridge (MCP CR18) is marked “A1,” so the chips on the Asus board are of a more recent date. All of the test results are based on the Asus A7N8X rev. 1.02, although note that this board is also not in its final version.
View of the ports on the Asus A7N8X.
Details on the Test Boards, Continued
Detail of the BIOS settings.
Although we’re well supplied with various DDR400 modules from various manufacturers, the Asus A7N8X only works with the Corsair modules. The current market situation is such that none of the board manufacturers have received a final chipset from Nvidia. So it’s still not certain when this component will make its appearance. We’ve already discussed the details of the nForce 2 chipset in the previous article Full Power: NVIDIA Attacks With nForce2.
In the test setup: the ATI Radeon 9700 Pro reference card.
DDR400 memory (512 MB, CL2.5) from Corsair for dual operation.
Comparison of Nvidia chipsets.
New CPUs, Old Boards: Athlon XP 2800+ Starting from KT333
The latest Athlon XP CPUs, 2700+ and 2800+, only work with boards that have a 166 MHz FSB clock. This means that your only choices are VIA KT333, KT400 or SiS 746. Older motherboards with VIA KT133A, KT266, KT266A or SiS 735 won’t work with the new Athlon XP processors. On the one hand, the FSB clock is not supported with these boards, and on the other hand, the power of the voltage converter is not enough for operation.
All in all, we have a situation that is similar to that of Intel’s P4: backwards compatibility is limited. Furthermore, you have to ask whether it makes sense to run an old KT133A board and SDRAM (PC133) with an Athlon XP 2800+ and hope that you’re lucky.
Copper Interconnects in Nine Layers
Architecture of the new Thoroughbred “B” core.
A modern CPU, such as the AMD Athlon XP or Intel Pentium 4, consists of transistor layers (silicon) and several interconnect layers. Ever since it introduced the Athlon with the Thunderbird core and six interconnect layers, AMD has been continually increasing the number of layers. The Palomino core followed with seven layers, because the SSE logic and the optimized cache lines required a greater number of interconnects. The next step came about with the Thoroughbred “A,” which had an eighth layer. With the shrinking of the circuit paths and the distances between them from 0.05 micron to 0.13 micron, and with the new component layout, further interconnects were required.
The Thoroughbred “B” holds the current record with a total of nine copper interconnect layers. Compared to the Thoroughbred “A” with eight layers, the introduction of this new layer involves completely new interconnects. The result is an increased number of circuit paths: the conductivity of the connections within the processor is increased, and thus the thermal dissipation is automatically reduced. In addition, AMD has thrown in further capacitors in order to significantly reduce transistor interference that results from the combination of the interconnect layers and capacities at high clock speeds.
View of the interconnect layers in modern processors (here, the P4 Northwood is shown).
To sum up: the resistances between the transistors have increased (crosstalk effect). In order to differentiate between the two types of Thoroughbred cores, AMD has added an extra “B” to the label for the new CPUs. In the future, AMD plans to introduce the SOI technique for the first time with its Barton core. Processors manufactured with SOI technology are supposed to be able to process signals faster and with less thermal dissipation, achieving up to 35% higher clock speeds with the same dissipation.
History: Protection Against Thermal Death
About a year ago, THG stirred up quite a commotion in the industry with its article Горячо! Как современные процессоры защищены от перегрева?. Accompanying the article was the very first downloadable video, which shows the dramatic behavior of an AMD Athlon with a Palomino core, equipped with a thermal diode, when the CPU cooler fails during operation.
The alarms sounded at AMD, and the THG crew met several times with engineers from the manufacturers in question (AMD and Siemens). A few weeks later, AMD introduced a new circuitry logic to a small group of people. This was supposed to turn off the power supply as soon as the die temperature surpassed 85 degrees Celsius.
In order to guarantee faultless protection, the CPU temperature is measured by the thermal diode in very short time intervals, which ensures that the power can be switched off in time. Currently, all motherboard makers have a copy of the new “Thermal Guide” from AMD.
Comparison: T-Bred “B” vs. T-Bred “A” vs. Palomino
| Processor core | Number of layers | CPU classes |
| AMD Thunderbird | 6 | Athlon 650 MHz to 1400 MHz |
| AMD Palomino | 7 | Athlon XP 1500+ to XP 2100+ |
| AMD Thoroughbred “A” | 8 | Athlon XP 1700+ to XP 2200+ |
| AMD Thoroughbred “B” | 9 | Athlon XP 2400+ to XP 3000+ |
| Processor (Thoroughbred “A”) | FSB frequency | Clock frequency | Model Number |
| AMD Athlon XP 1500+ | 133 MHz | 1333 MHz | 1500 |
| AMD Athlon XP 1600+ | 133 MHz | 1400 MHz | 1600 |
| AMD Athlon XP 1700+ | 133 MHz | 1466 MHz | 1700 |
| AMD Athlon XP 1800+ | 133 MHz | 1533 MHz | 1800 |
| AMD Athlon XP 1900+ | 133 MHz | 1600 MHz | 1900 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2000+ | 133 MHz | 1666 MHz | 2000 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2100+ | 133 MHz | 1733 MHz | 2100 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2200+ | 133 MHz | 1800 MHz | 2200 |
| Processor (Thoroughbred “B”) | FSB frequency | Clock frequency | Model Number |
| AMD Athlon XP 2400+ | 133 MHz | 2000 MHz | 2400 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2600+ | 133 MHz | 2133 MHz | 2600 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2700+ | 166 MHz | 2166 MHz | 2700 |
| AMD Athlon XP 2800+ | 166 MHz | 2250 MHz | 2800 |
| AMD Athlon XP 3000+ | 166 MHz | 2xxx MHz | 3000 |
With the launch of the Thoroughbred core in the “B” version, AMD Athlon reaches the fourth level in its evolution. After the K7 in 1999 the first core with integrated L2 cache, the Thunderbird, was introduced about two years ago. AMD made a further step in October 2001 by introducing the Palomino core, which essentially consisted of the SSE command set expansion and optimized cache lines.
The Thoroughbred core has been around since June 2002, and this one involves a rearrangement of the CPU’s internal components, as well as smaller structures (0.13-micron). Detailed information is given in the table below. The animated GIF graphic gives you an idea of how the size has changed with the individual CPUs. In order to give you a complete picture, we’ve included the data for the Barton core, which is expected to be out in Q3. The Barton represents the fifth and last level of development of the Athlon program, based on Socket 462.
Comparison: T-Bred “B” vs. T-Bred “A” vs. Palomino, Continued
| Manufacturer | AMD | AMD | AMD | AMD |
| Processor | Athlon XP Thoroughbred “B” Core |
Athlon XP Thoroughbred “A” Core |
Athlon XP Palomino Core |
Athlon Thunderbird Core |
| Introduction | Q3, 2002 | Q2, 2002 | October 9, 2001 | October 9, 2001 |
| Clock Frequencies | 1.86 – 2.66 GHz | 1.46 – 1.80 GHz | 1.2 – 1.80 GHz | 0.65 – 1.40 GHz |
| Manufacturing Process | 0.13 µm | 0.13 µm | 0.18 µm | 0.18 µm |
| Die size | 84 mm² | 80 mm² | 128 mm² | 128 mm² |
| Number of Gates | 37.5 Million | 37.5 Million | 37.5 Million | 37.5 Million |
| Platform | Socket462 | Socket462 | Socket462 | Socket462 |
| CPU Bus Clock (Front Side Bus) | 133/166 MHz 266/333 MHz DDR |
133 MHz 266 MHz DDR |
133 MHz 266 MHz DDR |
100/133 MHz 200/266 MHz DDR |
| L1 Execution Cache Size | 64 KB | 64 KB | 64 KB | 64 KB |
| Execution Pre Decode? | no | no | no | no |
| L1 Data Cache Size | 64 KB | 64 KB | 64 KB | 64 KB |
| Hardware Data Prefetch | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| L1 Cache Clock | core clock | core clock | core clock | core clock |
| L1 Data Cache Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache Size | 256 KB | 256 KB | 256 KB | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache Clock | core clock | core clock | core clock | core clock |
| L2 Cache Addressable Range | 64 GB | 64 GB | 64 GB | 64 GB |
| Processor Data Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| Platform Support | ||||
| Chipsets | VIA KT333 to KT400 SiS 735 and SiS 745 Nvidia nForce, nForce 2 AMD 750 and 760 |
VIA KT133A to KT400 SiS 735 and SiS 745 ALi Magik 1 Nvidia nForce, nForce 2 AMD 750 and 760 |
VIA KT133 to KT400 SiS 735 and SiS 745 ALi Magik 1 Nvidia nForce, nForce 2 AMD 750 and 760 |
VIA KT133 to KT400 SiS 735 and SiS 745 ALi Magik 1 Nvidia nForce, nForce 2 AMD 750 and 760 |
| Type of Memory | SDRAM, DDR-SDRAM | SDRAM, DDR-SDRAM | SDRAM, DDR-SDRAM | SDRAM, DDR-SDRAM |
| Memory Clock | 100/133/166/200 MHz | 100/133/166/200 MHz | 100/133/166 MHz | 100/133/166 MHz |
| Instruction Extensions | ||||
| MMX | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Enhanced 3DNow! | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| 3DNow! Professional | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| SSE | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| SSE2 | no | no | no | no |
| Electrical Specifications | ||||
| SMP-Support | no (‘not officially endorsed or supported’) | no (‘not officially endorsed or supported’) | no (‘not officially endorsed or supported’) | no (‘not officially endorsed or supported’) |
| Core Voltage | 1.65 Volt | 1.65 Volt | 1.75 Volt | 1.75 Volt |
| Thermal Protection (Thermal Diode) | yes | yes | yes | yes |
| Integrated Thermal Protection Logic | no, requires logic on motherboard | no, requires logic on motherboard | no, requires logic on motherboard | no, requires logic on motherboard |
New Guidelines for CPU Coolers: No Cheap Models
A new CPU cooler for Athlon XP 2200+ (1800 MHz) with high contact pressure, approved by AMD.
Effective cooling for the processor is an important topic when you make the switch from Athlon XP with the Palomino core to the Athlon XP with the Thoroughbred core (“A” and “B” versions). Although the new Athlon XP has a marginally lower power intake, a higher performance CPU cooler is required nevertheless.
This can be explained by the following: because the CPU surface is 40% smaller, there is automatically less surface area available for heat dissipation. This begs the question of why AMD still doesn’t use a heat spreader, as do the Intel Pentium 4 and the AMD “Hammer.” For OEM manufacturers and those who buy new Athlon XP processors, the updated guidelines from AMD (valid since June 10, 2002) are:
Only CPU coolers equipped with a copper plate (or adequate heat transfer capabilities) as the contact surface to the CPU die may be used. Or, to put it another way: if you want to upgrade your PC with an Athlon XP based on the T-bred, you can safely throw out your old aluminum cooler. Otherwise, if your Athlon XP (the new model) dies a thermal death when used together with a cheap cooler, AMD is not giving you any guarantees.
A countersunk copper contact on a CPU cooler.
A CPU cooler from Taisol.
Test Setup and Details
| Intel Hardware (Socket 478) | |
| Processors 133 MHz FSB 533 MHz Memory Clock |
Pentium 4 2.8 GHz (2800 MHz) Pentium 4 2.66 GHz (2666 MHz) Pentium 4 2.53 GHz (2533 MHz) Pentium 4 2.4 GHz (2400 MHz) Pentium 4 2.26 GHz (2266 MHz) |
| Processors 100 MHz FSB 400 MHz Memory Clock |
Pentium 4 2.6 GHz (2600 MHz) Pentium 4 2.5 GHz (2500 MHz) Pentium 4 2.4 GHz (2400 MHz) Pentium 4 2.2 GHz (2200 MHz) Pentium 4 2.0 GHz (2000 MHz) |
| Motherboard and Memory | Asus P4T533-C (Intel 850E chipset) Revision: 1.01 Bios: 1007 (27.08.2002) 2x 256 MB RDRAM, PC800, 533 MHz, 40ns, Infineon 2x 256 MB RDRAM, PC1066, 533 MHz, 32ns, Kingstone |
| Driver | Intel 850E Driver V 4.00.1013 (7.06.2002) Intel IAA Driver V 2.2.2.2150 |
| AMD Hardware (Socket 462) | |
| Processors 166 MHz FSB 166 MHz Memory Clock |
Athlon XP 2800+ (2250 MHz) Athlon XP 2700+ (2166 MHz) |
| Processors 133 MHz FSB 166 MHz Memory Clock |
Athlon XP 2600+ (2133 MHz) Athlon XP 2400+ (2000 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) |
| Motherboard and Memory | Asus A7N8X (NVIDIA NForce 2) Revision: 1.02 Bios: 1.08 (04.09.2002) 2 x 256 MB DDR 400, Corsair, CL 2.0, PC 3200 |
| Drivers | nForce2 Driver Version: 2.77 Package |
| Common Hardware | |
| Graphics Card | ATI Radeon 9700 Pro Memory: 128 MB DDR-SDRAM Memory Clock: 620 MHz (256 Bit) Chip Clock: 325 MHz |
| Hard Drive | Maxtor 6L040J2 40GB UDMA100, 7200 rpm, 2 MB Cache |
| Network | D-Link DFE-530TX (10/100 Mbit) |
| CDROM | Asus 52x |
| Drivers and Software | |
| Graphics Driver | CATALYST 02.3 (build 6.13.10.6166) ATI Control Panel build 6.13.10.3027 |
| DirectX | Version: 8.1 |
| OS | Windows XP, Build 2600 SP1 (English) |
| 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 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 MultiMedia 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 |
| VirtualDub | Version 1.4.10 (build 13870) DV to mpeg 4 (DivX 5.0.2 Pro) DV Video (1.17 GB) / Audio = no Encoding bitrate = 1000 kbps Resize = 720 x 576 |
| Pinnacle Studio 8 | Version 8.1.1 Rendering – DVD Compatible no Audio |
| Lame | Version 3.92 32 bit Dos Promt, 178 MB Wave File, 44100 Hz 32 – 320 Kbit sampling |
| e-merge Winace | Version 2.2 178 MB Wave file, Compression = Best, Dictionary = 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 3D Studio Max 5 | Characters “Dragon_Charater_rig” Rendering Single, 1024×768 |
| Unreal Tournament 2003 | Patch 1 1080 1024 x 768 / 32 bit / Audio = off benchmark.exe Texture Detail = Normal, Character Detail = Normal World Detail = Highest, Physics Detail = High all = on, Decal Stay = High |
Benchmarks under Windows XP
| OpenGL-Performance | Quake 3 Arena “Demo 1” and “NV15 Demo” |
| 3D-Rendering | SPEC Viewperf 7 – new – |
| 3D-Rendering | Lightwave 7.5 Build 572 |
| 3D-Rendering | Cinema 4D XL 7.303 |
| 3D-Rendering | 3D Studio Max 5 – new – |
| DirectX 7 Game | 3D Mark 2000 Pro (Version 1.1) |
| DirectX 8 Game | Unreal Tournament 2003 (Demo) – new – |
| DirectX 8 Game | 3D Mark 2001 SE (Version 1.1) |
| DirectX 8 Game | Comanche 4 – new – |
| Audio-Encoding MP3 | Lame-MP3-Encoder 3.92 |
| Audio-Encoding MP3 | mp3 Maker Platinium 3.04 |
| Video-Encoding MPEG-2 | Pinnacle Studio 8.1.1 – new – |
| Video-Encoding MPEG-4 | Virtual Dub 1.4.1 and Divx 5.02 Pro – new – |
| Office-Performance | Sysmark 2002 |
| Archiving | WinACE 2.2 |
| CPU and Multimedia Bench | PC Mark 2002 |
| CPU and Multimedia Bench | SiSoft Sandra 2002 SP1 |
We used different benchmark tests in order to give you a complete and balanced picture of what the new Athlon XP 2800+ can do. The benchmark results from a total of 20 different CPUs provide a general overview. As a point of comparison, all of the newer AMD Athlon XP processors are included.
There are quite a few new aspects to the benchmark tests. The OpenGL performances are evaluated using various Quake 3 tests; the Direct3D performance from the DirectX package is measured with 3D Mark 2000 Pro (version 1.1, based on DirectX7) and 3D Mark 2001 SE (based on DirectX 8).
A comprehensive test scenario is provided 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. New to the tests is Virtual Dub, which we use to convert a 1.2 GB DV video file to MPEG-4 format through the codec DivX 5.02 Pro. In addition, an MPEG-2 file is created with new video editing software, Pinnacle Studio 8.
Part of the standard repertoire for evaluating rendering performance is Lightwave version 7.5 from Newtek, 3D Studio Max version 5.0 and Cinema 4D XL 7.303. Here, 3D Studio Max 5.0 is the highlight – it is used for the very first time ever by THG. Also important for practical applications is data-packing, for which we use WinACE-Packer 2.11.
In order to test office performance, the Sysmark 2002 benchmark is used. A comprehensive 3D benchmark suite is provided by the new SPEC Viewperf 7. And, of course, SiSoft Sandra 2002 SP1 shouldn’t be left out. New to the 3D gaming benchmarks are Unreal Tournament 2003 and Comanche 4.
OpenGL-Performance: Quake 3 Arena
In the five time-demo runs from Quake 3 Arena, the picture is consistent: the Athlon XP 2700+ and 2800+ attain considerable performance gains compared to the XP2600+, thanks to Dual-Channel DDR333. They don’t quite reach the performance level of the P4/2800, though.
DirectX 7 Games: 3D Mark 2000
3D Mark 2000 shows the Direct3D performance of DirectX 7 under Windows XP. Just as in the old days, the AMD Athlon XP 2800+, together with the nFoce 2 chipset and Dual DDR333, soars above the fastest Intel Pentium 4/2800 with Rambus memory (PC1066), by over 800 points. The Athlon XP 2800+ scores a humongous 16239 points!
DirectX 8 Games: 3D Mark 2001 SE
3D Mark 2000 shows the Direct3D performance of DirectX 8 under Windows XP. It has only a slight lead, but it’s still ahead: the AMD Athlon XP 2800+ beats the Intel Pentium 4/2800 once more – with an advantage of 28 points!
DirectX 8 Hardcore Game: Comanche 4
Comanche 4 is one of the first games on the market to support DirectX8. With its high clock speed, the Athlon XP 2800+ can basically gain ground and reach the performance of a Pentium 4/2533 with PC800. When older processors are used, such as the Athlon 1400, the game can hardly be played.
DirectX 8 Hardcore Game: Unreal Tournament 2003
Another one of the latest games supporting DirectX 8 is Unreal Tournament 2003. With just about 207 frames, the Athlon XP 2800+ takes first place ahead of the P4/2800 with 199 frames.
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 chart shows that the AMD Athlon XP 2800+ does the job in 90 seconds, thereby beating the P4/2800 with 93 seconds. And so the tables have turned.
MP3-Audio-Encoding: MP3 Maker Platinium
Video-Encoding MPEG-4: Virtual Dub und Divx 5.02 Pro
When converting a 1.2 GB DV video file to MPEG-4 using Virtual Dub and DivX 5.02, the Athlon XP 2800+ achieves the best performance – even ahead of the Intel Pentium 4/2800. The AMD processor does the task in 277 seconds, while the P4 takes 286 seconds.
Video-Encoding MPEG-2: Pinnacle Studio 8.1.1
The AMD Athlon XP 2800+ takes 232.4 seconds to encode an MPEG-2 film with Pinnacle Studio 8.1.1, which is significantly faster than the P4/2800’s 265.8 seconds.
SiSoft Sandra 2002 Benchmarks: CPU und Multimedia
In the SiSoft Sandra Benchamark 2002, the Athlon XP 2800+ takes the lead in two out of the three tests. As ever, our view is that this benchmark does not represent realistic performance values. Many users get their hopes up too high when they compare their own results.
Multimedia Performance: PC Mark 2002
In the CPU benchmark tests, the Pentium 4/2800 is just a bit ahead of the AMD Athlon XP 2800+.
Office-/Internet-Performance: Sysmark 2002
In all three parts of this test, the Athlon XP 2800+ clearly lags behind the Pentium 4/2800. A note about all AMD Athlon XP CPUs: optimizations are lacking, so the AMD processors fall a bit behind when compared to the Intel models. However, in office performance, the Athlon XP 2800+ almost reaches the performance of a P4/2666.
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 2800+ is slightly ahead of the Pentium 4/2800.
3D-Rendering: Newtek Lightwave 7.5
In the Lightwave benchmark, the optimizations of the Pentium 4 processors make themselves all too clear – the Athlon XP 2800+ lands defeated in midfield.
3D-Rendering: Cinema 4D XL 7.303
The AMD Athlon gets aggressive in the Cinema benchmark: here, the Athlon XP 2800+ takes top position and puts the P4/2800 in its place. In any case, there’s a difference of 21 seconds! Here, Intel’s optimizations have done nothing for the P4.
3D-Rendering: 3D Studio Max 5.0
In this benchmark, ten frames from the “Rabbit” scene are calculated at 1024 x 768. The Athlon XP 2800+ achieves a stellar performance, leaving the Intel P4/2800 in its wake. Here, the Athlon takes 98 seconds, compared to the 102 from the P4.
3D-Rendering Performance: SPEC Viewperf 7
The SPEC benchmark shows consistent results: the Athlon XP 2800+ beats the Intel Pentium 4/2800 with Dual RDRAM (533 MHz, PC1066) in all of the disciplines.
Conclusion: Athlon XP 2800+ is the Performance Winner, But Not Available Until 2003
The benchmark results prove that, with its Athon XP 2800+ plus the nForce2 chipset, AMD can take back the performance crown. Above all, because the Front Side Bus clock has been increased from 133 MHz to 166 MHz, the CPU can take full advantage of the higher bandwidth of the nForce2 chipset with Dual DDR333. This offers a theoretical bandwidth of 6.4 GB/s (PC3200 x 2).
Furthermore, note that the Front Side Bus clock and memory clock now communicate synchronously. Here, we refer to our lab findings regarding the new 166 MHz FSB clock: when the currently fastest VIA KT333 chipset is used (KT400 is much slower than KT333!), the higher FSB clock results in an increase of just around 5% in the total performance. And, this is only valid for the top of the motherboards and special memory modules, none of which can be found in PCs of the discount class. But it’s a different story when Nvidia’s nForce 2 enters the scene: here, the performance increases by 20% to 25%, depending on the application used. There’s only limited backwards compatibility with the Athlon XP 2800+, however: at least a VIA KT333 motherboard with 166 MHz FSB is required.
The test results of the two new Athlon XP processors are quite convincing, but there’s still a bit of a damper on the party: AMD won’t be able to deliver these fast CPUs until the beginning of next year. The nForce 2 chipset is also still in a late beta phase, so currently, motherboard manufacturers aren’t able to offer any final version boards. Observing the market situation from a political point of view, it’s easily concluded that the Athlon XP 2800+ has only been launched for prestige. AMD clearly has the Intel Pentium 4/2800 in view, but Intel’s CPU is already available. Thus, the Athlon XP 2800+ remains only a virtual market competitor for the top P4 model. Hopefully, this won’t lead ambitious AMD fans to despair, because the Athlon XP 2200+ with the Thoroughbred A core has already been available for three months now. And, we’ve checked out the availability at various computer specialty stores: they’re currently taking waiting lists for the Athlon XP 2400+ and 2600+.
Here, we’d like to repeat our wish once more: Intel needs more competitive pressure from AMD, and that probably won’t happen until the Claw Hammer is launched. In the short term, the modified Athlon XP with the Barton core (512 KB L2 Cache) will ensure a further performance boost for the gradually aging Socket A platform. Nevertheless, the performance of Dual-Channel DDR333 is convincing because it brings system performance up to the level of a top P4 model with Dual RDRAM (PC1066).
