PDA

View Full Version : PIII 500 with G400 beats the Athlon 500?



franksch3
9th February 2000, 08:07
Hi guys,

a friend of mine uses a PIII 500 (coppermine, full speed cache, 100 MHz FSB), with the same G400 card as I have.

In 3DMark 2000 with PIII optimization he gets a score of 145, while with Athlon optimization I only get a score of 138.

I find this very odd, since every review over the net still shows the Athlon above the PIII coppermine (at least at lower speeds).

What kind of scores do others here with a Athlon 500 get?

Frank Schoondermark

Goc
9th February 2000, 08:13
Hi frank

Stay away from 3dmark2k... It sucks, and is extremly biased... Run a favorite game of yours or a favorite program, and then see which one is better. Benchmarks suck... it's just a load of eyecandy and other bullsh*t.

nosuchluck
9th February 2000, 12:06
3dmark2k is only good for the eye candy.
INTEL helped pay for madonion to make 3dmark2k, so who's processor do you think it is going to run on faster..... http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

Do not use the final "3dmarks" as a accurate benchmark of your system. Just look at the pretty graphics, and when you are ready to do a benchmark, fire up quake 3 or descent 3 for d3d.

MY 2 cents

[This message has been edited by nosuchluck (edited 09 February 2000).]

Nuno
9th February 2000, 12:33
Altought Athlon virtually left katmai in the dust, Intel catched up with the coppermine. So, depending of the code implementation, athlons are faster here, coppermines are faster there.

3dmark2000 seems to have a slightly better SSE implementation than 3Dnow!. But we donīt play 3dmark2000 that often, do we? http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif

paulcs
9th February 2000, 16:09
I'm with Nuno here. I thought this was a Katmai issue as well.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

Marshmallowman
9th February 2000, 20:15
Mind you, the performance of the K7 has been a bit limited, due the cache module running at a fractional speed of the CPU, especially at higher speeds.(not to mention memory latency issues)

BUT..AMD has just shown a 1.1Ghz with normal air cooling. .18 micron process on die cache(no crappy fractional cache), copper interconnects.
Epox has there PC133(and V(irtual)RAM) enabled AGP 4x board(not hyped ramBUST ram)

My celery 450 does not have long for this world, I am saving for my AGP 4x AMD K7 at 1G.

Mark F
9th February 2000, 22:21
----------------------------------------BUT..AMD has just shown a 1.1Ghz with normal air cooling. .18 micron process on die cache(no crappy fractional cache), copper interconnects
----------------------------------------

...And your point is? Intel has shown >1GHz air-cooled. So what?!? The discusion has been about shipping equally clocked CPU.

Mark F.


------------------
OH NO, my retractable cup holder swallowed a CD

Wombat
10th February 2000, 09:02
That's true. Lucky for us, AMD is shipping their faster CPU's. Intel.........not really.

alessandro
11th February 2000, 08:22
AMD is already making 850Mhz athlons(they make the Announcement yesterday) but as EVERYBODY knows you can't find a PIII800 in the market and the AMD 850 will be out next week to the market.Don't forget also that in february PentiumIII chip will not be delivered in Asia and Europe AT ALL.(Major problems on Intel chip productions.)On the other habd Athlons 800 and 750 are very easy to find(exept the same fro the 850Mhz one next week)

franksch3
12th February 2000, 05:41
Although I didn't ask for what kind of speed PIII's and Athlons are now manufactured, I'll respond my findings.

For some strange reason in 3DMark 2000 my score went back up to 153 CPUMarks using Athlon optimization. So the Athlon is indeed faster. :-)

And 3DMark 2000 doesn't seem as intel biased as some of you would like to believe.

Frank

paulcs
12th February 2000, 12:11
I just noticed something. I don't think 3DMark 2000 is biased towards anything. Everyone seems to have a complaint or two about it. I think it's just broken.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[This message has been edited by paulcs (edited 12 February 2000).]

Targon
16th February 2000, 07:53
If you looked around at the different reports about the 1.5GHz Willamette, you will find that Intel didn't even run any benchmarks on their 1.5GHz system! Anyone can put a message on the screen that says it's running at 3.0GHz if they wanted and suddenly it's valid? Anyone who's been watching the situation also knows that you can get an Athlon 650 for cheaper than you can a P3-500. http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif THERE's the comparison that makes people run out and buy Athlons, faster and cheaper, go figure http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/smile.gif