[Blackmage]

I got my new system togther for about a month but never really did any benchmarking on it.
So im going to give you a little review of the system below, but im going to do it diffrent im going to start from overclocked to stock .


System

630 Intel Pentium® 4 LGA775 CPU
Zalman Fatal1ty FS-C77 CPU Cooler
Asus P5ND2-SLi Standard PCI-E nForce4
Zalman VF700-AlCu
256MB XFX PCI-E *Extreme Edition* GF7800GT*486 Core 1.20Ghz Mem
1GB Corsair (2x512MB) DDR2 667MHz
LG GSA-4163B Black 16x16 ±R Dual Layer DVD Writer
200Gb Maxtor Diamondmax Plus 10
580W HiperPower Type-R Modular Blue PSU Quiet Dbl Fan
Coolmaster CMStacker Silver Trim
Creative Labs Sound Blaster Live 7.1


Test System Overclocked

630 Intel Pentium® 4 LGA775 CPU@ 3.93GHZ
1.5V/1.49 after Droop
38*C idle
Asus P5ND2-SLi Standard PCI-E nForce4 chipset@1.5V
30*C idle
256MB XFX PCI-E *Extreme Edition* GF7800GT*@486 Core
1.13Ghz Mem
46*C idle

Software Used to benchmark

3DMARK01
3DMARK03
3DMARK05
SUPER PI
AQUAMARK
SIS SOFT Sandra

Results Next

[Blackmage]

Results

3DMARK01SE


3DMARK03


3DMARK05

[xTrEmEoVrClOcKr]

Nice results so far, do some Superpi 1.4m for us too .

[Blackmage]

More Results


AQUAMARK3


SUPER PI

[xTrEmEoVrClOcKr]

Wow, 33 seconds isn't bad at ALL for 3.9ghz. I think you could go a lot further. What cooling do you have on the 630? Stock?

[Blackmage]

i have an Zalman Fatal1ty FS-C77 CPU Cooler, the thing is this the highest i can go with this mobo i think an P5WD2 would do the trick.

More Results

SIS SOFT

[Know Nuttin]

1.5v, is that correct? that seems rather high for a 630 to reach 3.9ghz. Maybe unlucky.

[Blackmage]

Originally Posted by Know Nuttin

1.5v, is that correct? that seems rather high for a 630 to reach 3.9ghz. Maybe unlucky.

after the droop 1.48, i think my mobo has a big part to play with the cpu voltage being so high. i want a 975x mobo

[Know Nuttin]

1.48 is not a bad droop at all.

How are the temps with that cooler?

[Blackmage]

38*C idle but the Artic sliver anit dried in yet i say 36*C after as dry-in

[larva]

This is a interesting opportunity to compare the 630/DDR2 combo to my 506/DDR setup, as the sytems are otherwise very similar. It appears they perform more alike than different, especially as the form of evaluation moves closer to application testing. Here is a summary of my system:

Abit AG8-V i915p m/b
Retail P4-506 @ 200fsb/4GHz
Retail Intel aluminum heatsink
2x512MB BH5 in 1:1 (400MHz) 2-2-2-4
EVGA 7800GT, 480/1170MHz (stock cooling)
Sound Bastid Live
Antec TPII-480
XP Pro SP1 - 78.01 driver

Here's a summary of the 506/630 results comparison:

Test--------506@4GHz-----630@3.93GHz---506 scores X percentage of 630

3DM01 --------25,059----------26,014---------------------96.3%
3DM03 --------16,641----------17,183---------------------96.8%
3DM05 ---------7,685-----------7,665--------------------100.3%
AM3 ----------76,275----------82,121---------------------92.9%
SuperPI 1M ------34s--------------33s---------------------97.1%
Sandra (arith) -10,432----------11,354---------------------91.8%

average ---------------------------------------------------95.8%

The systems are pretty close in terms of configuration, with my system having a tick more cpu clock and his having a bit more video card clock. But about as close as you are going to get without coordinating. The 630 setup provided 3.7 and 3.2% better results on 3DMark 01 and 03, repsectively, with the 506 actually scoring higher on 3DM05 (within margin of error of the test). The extra L2 cache and memory clock rate serve the 630 well in AM3, allowing it to open up a 7.1% lead. Super Pi results are a 2.9% better on the 630, with the sandra arithmetic cpu synthetic pointing to a roughly 8% advantage on cpu-bound functions. This is believable in light of the 7% advantage demonstrated on the cpu-sensitive AM3 test.

All in all, more alike than they are different. I think the lack of HT is a more serious drawback to the 506 than any performance disparity, but nonetheless doesn't spoil the (terrific) value it represents. I would estimate roughly a third of the performanc difference between these two setup is the L2 size disparity, a third the fsb difference, and the last third the system memory clock rate difference. This is a crude generalization, but is close enough to give some idea of the trends at work here.

Here's the thread I created to report my 506 experience, which has some discussion of the parts and performance as well as screenshots:

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=422137

[Blackmage]

nice Comparison larva, would you up for a slight test?

What i wanted to do is do a 3.6 overclock and have our video card clocked at stock 400/1000 and do some comparison work! are you up for it?

[RodneyJM]

Blackmage, you should have got the P5WD2 mobo in the first place, nothing beats a good intel overclock than when its on its own brand chipset.
The Corsair 5400UL's are the go for Ram too, if you want outrageous memory power from Intel platforms.

[Blackmage]

Originally Posted by RodneyJM

Blackmage, you should have got the P5WD2 mobo in the first place, nothing beats a good intel overclock than when its on its own brand chipset.
The Corsair 5400UL's are the go for Ram too, if you want outrageous memory power from Intel platforms.

yes i knew that, but i wanted SLI and im waiting for Intel and nvidia to make a deal soon, if not my next upgrade might be too the AMD ship.

[Joeteck]

I'm very impressed that you can get a 3Ghz to almost 4Ghz, but thats about it. Such a big jump with very little gain.

An AMD 64 4000+ (2.4Ghz) with a 7800GTX, can hit 8K on 3Dmark 2005 stock.

It is a shame that you have to hit 4Ghz to come anywhere near a stock 2.4Ghz AMD... But you should never compare Mhz to Mhz... But it is still funny...

[Vrykyl]

those are great results so far Blackmage - im still burning in my 630...hopefully il have some comparison clocks up soon for you to take a look at

[Blackmage]

Originally Posted by Vrykyl

those are great results so far Blackmage - im still burning in my 630...hopefully il have some comparison clocks up soon for you to take a look at

can't wait too see that, 7800GTX in action.

Originally Posted by Joeteck

I'm very impressed that you can get a 3Ghz to almost 4Ghz, but thats about it. Such a big jump with very little gain.

An AMD 64 4000+ (2.4Ghz) with a 7800GTX, can hit 8K on 3Dmark 2005 stock.

It is a shame that you have to hit 4Ghz to come anywhere near a stock 2.4Ghz AMD... But you should never compare Mhz to Mhz... But it is still funny...

that 937MHZ jump does alot im going to do some stock benchie's and you will see what i mean.

[Joeteck]

Originally Posted by Blackmage

can't wait too see that, 7800GTX in action.




that 937MHZ jump does alot im going to do some stock benchie's and you will see what i mean.

Oh I'm sure... My point is that you have to overclock a 3ghz CPU to 3937Mhz to come anywhere near an AMD 64 4000+ (2.4 Ghz). Thats my point. A stock 3.0ghz would loose hands down anyway... The P4 is too power hungry now. Intel added the dual 12V rail thing and that failed. Intel's is just too power hungry per Ghz. An AMD 4000+ uses 89W stock. What does that Pentium use? Plus add another 1ghz overclock to that power hungry device. Hey I used to be an Intel lover. I love the Celeron D. Ghz to Ghz, AMD is the way to go. An AMD FX-57, will bitch slap the fastest P4... The FX-57 runs at 2.8Ghz... with a 2Ghz FSB. Don't get me wrong the 937Mhz increase is awesome, but not worth the effort. Thats just my outlook on it. I hope I did no offend anyone.

There are Intel lovers and then there are AMD lovers. I was an Intel lover, until I discovered how fast AMD really are... Now I love AMD.

[what]

Originally Posted by Joeteck

Oh I'm sure... My point is that you have to overclock a 3ghz CPU to 3937Mhz to come anywhere near an AMD 64 4000+ (2.4 Ghz). Thats my point. A stock 3.0ghz would loose hands down anyway... The P4 is too power hungry now. Intel added the dual 12V rail thing and that failed. Intel's is just too power hungry per Ghz. An AMD 4000+ uses 89W stock. What does that Pentium use? Plus add another 1ghz overclock to that power hungry device. Hey I used to be an Intel lover. I love the Celeron D. Ghz to Ghz, AMD is the way to go. An AMD FX-57, will bitch slap the fastest P4... The FX-57 runs at 2.8Ghz... with a 2Ghz FSB. Don't get me wrong the 937Mhz increase is awesome, but not worth the effort. Thats just my outlook on it. I hope I did no offend anyone.

There are Intel lovers and then there are AMD lovers. I was an Intel lover, until I discovered how fast AMD really are... Now I love AMD.

Stop your fanboy squawking and just wait until Conroe drops.

[Joeteck]

Originally Posted by what

Stop your fanboy squawking and just wait until Conroe drops.

Yeah, That will become available by the late 2006-2007 and the end of the Pentium 4!!!!
But as always we're waiting for Intel....