New Athlon 64 Machine Benches lower than P4!!!!?!?!?

plbowler · Dec 16, 2003

HELP!!

According to Sandra the new Athlon64 2 Ghz Machine I just finished clocks slower (considerably) than a P4 3.2. is this possible, or is this a glitch of a 32 bit environment?

Basic Specs:
AMD 64 |3200+ ATHLON 64
MB ASUS K8V DELUXE K8T800
DDRAM 512MB CORSAR64X64 512MB 400
POWER SUPPLY|ANTEC SL450 450W
AIW RAdeon 9600 Pro (It's not a gaming rig)
TWO WD CAv. 160 Gig SATA Drives in Raid 1 (Mirroring, is that 1?)

My 3Dmark03 score is 3010

I know that thats not enought to go on soooo.

Tell me what you guys need to know and I'll post it.
I'm at work now so I don't know the Sandra Whetstone etc. scores, but let me know what to post and I will

THIS IS VERY DISTURBING!!!

EDIT: Here is my 3DMark03 page.
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=1738037

I think I figured out the 3d mark issue, i have AGP running at 0x.

that doesn't explain the Sandra score tho-\

EDIT2: The ONLY settings I changed in the BIOS was to Disable the Promise Raid controller (I'm using the Via) and to disable the on board sound.

Steven4563 · Dec 16, 2003

run 3dmark2001SE also run pcmark2002/2004

stamasd · Dec 16, 2003

3dmark is not very relevant here, as it depends a LOT more on the video card than on the CPU. I once put a Geforce4Ti card in a p2/450 box (replacing a Geforce2 GTS) and the 3dmark scores jumped from 1500 to over 4000.

Sir Barton · Dec 16, 2003

your 3dmk03 score sounds about right for the card youre running. 3dmk03 is more video card dependent, whereas 3dmk01 is more system dependent.

plbowler · Dec 16, 2003

OK, will do. but what about sandra?
she still thinks it's slower than a P4 3.2

Vrykyl · Dec 16, 2003

not wanting to ask the obvious...but are you using the latest version of SiSoft Sandra? my benchmarks went up loads when i updated the program. Dont worry bout your 3dmark2003 score... look at my rig and its pathetic score!!

plbowler · Dec 16, 2003

yeah, I D/L'd it today.

I'm OK with the 3Dmark score then, I D/l'd PCmark 2004 and it seemed to just be a patch for 3Dmark03, I must've D/l'd something wrong or MajorGeeks is confused.

It's Sandra thats got me confused. Also this machine was assembled Monday, so there's been NO burn in.

Vrykyl · Dec 16, 2003

and youve defragged, scan disked and checked your running processes for unneccessary crap running in the background?

plbowler · Dec 16, 2003

ummm, no.
I just put it together, do I need to Defrag brand new Drives?

and as for processes, I never thought of that, I suppose thats akin to taking hte stereo out of your car when you go to the drag strip, I just assumed everyone left them running.

Vrykyl · Dec 16, 2003

you'd be amazed at the amout of useless stuff that works its way into your startup list....when i benchmark i kill all but the core 17 ish windows processes...if youv got anymore than 18 (inc task manager) theres stuff slowing you down. I know the drives are new...but you'll have installed windows and drivers and utilities.... and windows is notoriously messy. defrag it and see. also tell scandisk to check for errors and attempt recover of bad sectors...

plbowler · Dec 16, 2003

OK, it'll actually be fun to run scan disk on this badboy.

I've never seen a 160 gig HD formatted in 5 seconds (no joke). I'm sure Defrag will be twice as slow because of the RAID but it should still be FAAAAAAST.

Vrykyl · Dec 16, 2003

lol...have fun...my 500gb SATA raid configuration takes forever!!! (about 6 hours). I could always rent a couple of movies i suppose...

plbowler · Dec 16, 2003

really? crap, mine'll probably take about an hour then. I'll do that, then the Sandra Burn in, then the Bench marks.

What can I show you guys as far as Bios setting that will ensure i'm getting everything I can (with any hard core OC'ing) out of this rig?

Where do I change my AGP to 4x/8x?

Shade00 · Dec 16, 2003

Dude, did you install the Via 4-in-1s? AGP won't be enabled unless you install the chipset drivers.

Also, Sandra scores are going to be lower, so don't freak out. A P4 3.2 has more processing power because of the HT and it has a ton more bandwidth because of dual channel memory. Despite those advantages, the A64 is just as fast.

Vrykyl · Dec 16, 2003

it should be under advanced -- advanced chipset settings (as it is on mine)...just above enable AGP fast write. Itll be where ever you change your cpu fsb etc...

DaveB · Dec 16, 2003

First of all, Sandra scores don't mean much. But, I think you're looking at the inflated 2 SMT (HyperThreading) score for the P4 instead of the single-threaded one. Here's what I get:

A64 @ 2.26 GHz - 9378 MIPS, 3541/4627 MFLOPS

The overly enhanced HT score for the P4:
P4C (2 SMT) @ 3.2 GHz - 9858 MIPS, 4062/4325 MFLOPS

The single CPU score for the P4 (further down on the list)
P4C @ 3.2 GHz - 7869 MIPS, 2365/7139 MFLOPS

So, in reality, the real world score for the P4 would be somewhere between the (2 SMT) and single-threaded score. And it would be closer to the lower single-threaded score. Sandra gives inflated scores to duallies too since it simply likes to double the score on them. And that ain't reality either. So chill out, your scores are fine if they're close to mine. BTW, my Sandra says calculated PR 3393 which is about what you would expect.

Edit, I just tested my other rig (P4 3.06 @ 3.45 GHz) and it scored: 10356 MIPS, 2976/6697 MFLOPS - PR 4589. IMO, a little inflated.

Shade00 · Dec 16, 2003

DaveB said:
First of all, Sandra scores don't mean much. But, I think you're looking at the inflated 2 SMT (HyperThreading) score for the P4 instead of the single-threaded one. Here's what I get:

A64 @ 2.26 GHz - 9378 MIPS, 3541/4627 MFLOPS

The overly enhanced HT score for the P4:
P4C (2 SMT) @ 3.2 GHz - 9858 MIPS, 4062/4325 MFLOPS

The single CPU score for the P4 (further down on the list)
P4C @ 3.2 GHz - 7869 MIPS, 2365/7139 MFLOPS

So, in reality, the real world score for the P4 would be somewhere between the (2 SMT) and single-threaded score. And it would be closer to the lower single-threaded score. Sandra gives inflated scores to duallies too since it simply likes to double the score on them. And that ain't reality either. So chill out, your scores are fine if they're close to mine.

Thanks for bringing in some numbers, DaveB. You've illustrated exactly the point I was trying to get across in my earlier post.

By the way, don't forget to make sure you have the chipset drivers installed; like I said, your AGP card will be reported as running in PCI mode (maybe AGP 0x in your case). It'll take a chunk out of your scores.

DaveB · Dec 16, 2003

No problem. I added some numbers from my RDRAM P4 setup. Look at that PR! 4589!!!

plbowler · Dec 16, 2003

Shade: Oops, nope didn't install the 4-in-1's, thanks.

DaveB: I forget what they were, i'll look up when I get home, thats reassuring thanks, I'm happy with the system (except that it's not mine, I build it for someone at work) I just expected it to beat the p4 3.2.

I guess the real advantage will be wen anvil and a few other apps come out tho, the P4 3.2 won't even be allowed to play.

DaveB · Dec 16, 2003

You just have to realize that that 2 SMT score isn't real. Your A64 is beating the single-threaded P4 3.2C by quite a bit.

New Athlon 64 Machine Benches lower than P4!!!!?!?!?

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Tornado Guy

Member

Tornado Guy

Member

Tornado Guy

Member

Tornado Guy

Member

Member

Tornado Guy

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Similar threads