Shinoda said:
Mmm isnt the Pentium 4 EE a fair bit faster when it comes to encoding, and old directx games?
P4EE 3.4GHZ 2MB CACHE
P4EE 3.2GHZ 2MB CACHE
AMD FX-53 2.4GHZ 1MB CACHE
AMD FX-51 2.2GHZ 1MB CACHE
From this point on i will compare the P4EE 3.4 with the FX-53
basically what it comes down to is this:
(everything ran 1024x768 unless said with detailed settings)
Sysmark2004
-The P4EE leads by about 2%
Winstone (Content Creation and Business Content)
-The FX-53 leads both by about 15%+ and 8%+ respectively.
Divx encoding (to make the term "encoding" a little more specific)
-P4EE edges out over the FX-53 by about 1-2% or less.
DirectX9 (Farcry, Gunmetal, Aquamark 3 etc)
-FX-53 edges out on almost all games by also a small percentage
(this can also be atributted to the fact that newer DX9 games r dependent on teh videocard, but not all and not too much)
OpenGL
-In ine the infamous benching of Quake 3, the race is too close, like less than .3% difference with the P4EE having the advantage. In Wolfenstein ET, the FX-53 has almost a whopping 10% increase over the P4EE. In Jedi Knight Jedi Academy the difference is less than .4%, with the FX-53 leading by not even 1 whole fps.
DirectX8
-In Unreal Tournament 2003,in the flyby bench the FX-53 edges out over the P4EE by about 4%+. In the botmatch bench the the FX-53 gains momentum again this time with more than 16%. In warcraft 3 FT the FX-53 once again has the lead but by less than .5%
Rendering
-In a 3D Studio Max R5 test the P4EE has roughly a 10% or less lead.
In a lightwave test the P4EE has roughly a 6% or less lead.
Development Workstation
-In a Quake 3 source code compiling the the FX-53 has roughly a 20% lead.
^^^^so there u have it.
Test System
2 x 512Mb OCZ 3500 Platinum Ltd (2-2-2-6)
Seagate 120GB 7200 RPM (8MB Buffer)
Sapphire ATI Radeon 9800 PRO 128MB (AGP 8X) ATI Catalyst 4.1
Windows XP Professional SP1
and
Intel D875PBZ (Intel 875P Chipset)
ASUS SK8V (VIA K8T800 Chipset)
Respectively