Computer Processors

  Home arrow Computer Processors arrow Page 4 - Intel P4 800MHz FSB CPU Round-up
Watch our Tech Videos 
Dev Hardware Forums 
Computer Cases  
Computer Processors  
Computer Systems  
Digital Cameras  
Flat Panels  
Gaming  
Hardware Guides  
Hardware News  
Input Devices  
Memory  
Mobile Devices  
Motherboards  
Networking Hardware  
Opinions  
PC Cooling  
PC Speakers  
Peripherals  
Power Supply Units  
Software  
Sound Cards  
Storage Devices  
Tech Interviews  
User Experiences  
Video Cards  
Weekly Newsletter
 
Developer Updates  
Free Website Content 
 RSS  Articles
 RSS  Forums
 RSS  All Feeds
Write For Us 
Contact Us 
Site Map 
Privacy Policy 
Support 
 USERNAME
 
 PASSWORD
 
 
  >>> SIGN UP!  
  Lost Password? 
COMPUTER PROCESSORS

Intel P4 800MHz FSB CPU Round-up
By: Justifier
  • Search For More Articles!
  • Disclaimer
  • Author Terms
  • Rating: 5 stars5 stars5 stars5 stars5 stars / 26
    2003-10-09

    Table of Contents:
  • Intel P4 800MHz FSB CPU Round-up
  • More images
  • Benchmarks
  • Benchmarks Part 2
  • Overclocking
  • Overclocking Continued
  • Conclusion

  • Rate this Article: Poor Best 
      ADD THIS ARTICLE TO:
      Del.ici.ous Digg
      Blink Simpy
      Google Spurl
      Y! MyWeb Furl
    Email Me Similar Content When Posted
    Add Developer Shed Article Feed To Your Site
    Email Article To Friend
    Print Version Of Article
    PDF Version Of Article
     
     

    SEARCH DEV HARDWARE

    Intel P4 800MHz FSB CPU Round-up - Benchmarks Part 2


    (Page 4 of 7 )

    (Benchmarks continued...)

    Unreal Tournament 2003

    With Unreal Tournament '03 still being a staple at LAN Parties it would be a shame not to include the numbers for this popular game. As we did in Comanche4, we've included two resolutions, this time 640x480 to show the rawest of raw CPU power, and 1600x1200 just for the fun of it. We use the UT03 benchmarker developed by the crew at HardOCP.com to gather these results. Man does it make things easier. We used the CPU benchmark for both resolutions.

    Wow, to see such a small difference between a lowly 640x480 run and a beefy 1600x1200 run is more than impressive. What's even more impressive is that in the overall speed the 3.0GHz CPU turned in identical scores at both resolutions. That eludes that the video card is the bottleneck with that CPU and considering that we're using a Radeon9800 Pro, that's amazing.

    Aquamark Benchmark:

    Aquamark is your run of the mill 3D benchmark and is based on the Aquanox games' 3D engine. This was thrown into the mix simply for variety, and if things go as expected will reflect similar results to what we've seen, scale wise, in C4 and UT03.

    This bench showed pretty much as expected in the 1024x768 run, but threw us for a loop in the 1600x1200 runs. What we are seeing at 1600x1200 is almost the exact same scores across the board. This surprised me so much I reinstalled the 2.4c at the completion of the 3.0G benchmarks to see if I could replicate identical scores with both CPU's, indeed I could. It is apparent by the results that Aquamark puts a bit more smack down on your graphics card as it's CLEARLY the bottleneck at the higher resolution. So basically it leaves all of the CPU horsepower sitting on the table unused when you crank up the settings using even the most modern graphics cards available.

    3DMark2001 (Build 330)

    As old as this benchmark is, it still scales well with modern hardware and is the best synthetic offering available from Futuremark, in my opinion anyway. When you get a group of tech heads together arguing about who's PC performs better, their 3dM01 scores inevitably come up.

    Again we see the almost identical scaling we've been seeing (excluding hi-res gaming benchmarks) that we've seen thru all of these benchmarks at default speeds.

    3DMark2003 (Build 330)

    While we may raise a lot of eyebrows to continue using this benchmark after the controversy that's surrounded it, we still find it fun to run if nothing else. I won't be using it on a cross platform comparison anytime soon, but to compare like items I think it perform acceptably. Not to mention that like it's older brother 3dMark01, 3dMark03 results find their way into conversations just as much. Without drawing out or justification for running it, lets just run it.

    3DMark2003 Details

       

    P4 2.4c Default

    P4 2.6c Default

    P4 3.0GHz Default

    Well that was a lot of excitement over nothing, our results scale exactly as expected.

    I know that the majority of you are here to see the overclocking results of these CPU's and to find out what we were able to get from them. Taking that into consideration, let's get on to the overclocking section!

    More Computer Processors Articles
    More By Justifier

    blog comments powered by Disqus

    COMPUTER PROCESSORS ARTICLES

    - Intel Unveils Itanium 9500 Processors
    - Intel`s Ultra-Quick i5 and i7 Processors Ava...
    - Intel Nehalem
    - VIA Nano
    - Intel Atom
    - Intel Celeron 420
    - Intel Pentium E2140
    - Inside the Machine by Jon Stokes
    - Chip History from 1970 to Today
    - A Brief History of Chips
    - Intel Shows Off at Developer Forum
    - Core 2 Quadro Review
    - Core Concepts
    - AMD Takes on Intel with AM2 and HT
    - Intel Presler 955: Benchmarking the First 65...

    Developer Shed Affiliates

     




    © 2003-2019 by Developer Shed. All rights reserved. DS Cluster - Follow our Sitemap
    KEITHLEE2zdeconfigurator/configs/INFUSIONSOFT_OVERLAY.phpzdeconfigurator/configs/ OFFLOADING INFUSIONSOFTLOADING INFUSIONSOFT 1debug:overlay status: OFF
    overlay not displayed overlay cookie defined: TI_CAMPAIGN_1012_D OVERLAY COOKIE set:
    status off