Final Words

Speculation has churned for months over whether AMD could reach the release speeds necessary for Athlon64 to compete effectively with Pentium 4 and the upcoming Prescott processor. The other concern was whether 32-bit performance would be good enough to make the Athlon64 the winner that AMD needs right now. If Athlon64 is released as a 2.0GHz chip, as rumors have reported, then it looks like Athlon64 will be a Processor that is competitive with the best Pentium 4 in all areas, with compelling performance in several areas.

The impact of Dual-Channel memory is a little harder to estimate in our tests. Athlon64 has been widely reported to be single-channel, where Opteron is Dual-Channel. Again, we expect our results reported here to be in the ballpark. Particularly since reports from the web now indicate there will also be an AthlonFX introduced on the 23rd that is targeted at the Enthusiast, runs even faster, and is based on the Opteron with Dual-Channel memory.

Gaming is one area where our tests show Opteron at 2.0GHZ an amazing performer. When you find game benchmarks 10% to 20% higher, you are genuinely impressed. However, in some of the very latest DX9 benchmarks, Athlon64/Opteron was 40% to 50% faster. This will get the attention of the gaming community, which seems to have a genuine affection for anything AMD already. It is the kind of trend-setting performance that Athlon64 needed to get the attention of an influential market segment.

Workstation Graphics was expected to be a good performer for Athlon64/Opteron, and across the board, the 2.0Ghz Opteron did very well against the best from Intel. One particularly noteworthy area was the performance of the A64 level Opteron compared to an 875 Dual Xeon 3.06 system. We really expected the Xeon dually to trounce our single Opteron, but instead, found a virtual dead-heat. Multiple Opteron systems have been setting records in many areas, and we are certainly looking forward to looking at multiple 200 series Opterons after seeing what our single 144 can do.

The Content Creation and General Usage performance, while competitive, did not stand out like the other performance areas for the 2.0GHz Opteron. We were not really surprised in the Content Creation area, which has always been a challenge for AMD. But, we were a little surprised in the General Usage/Business area, which has always been an AMD strong suit. Since the top performers in this area are nForce2/Athlon combos, we expect that final release products will fare much better in this area. Remember that our Reference board is now a couple of months old, and much has been done in tweaking the nForce3 chipset already. We would be surprised if the Athlon64/nForce3 combo does not perform better in almost every area at launch.

As excited as we are with the performance we found in our Opteron tweaked to Athlon64, keep in mind that this is all 32-bit performance. To quote AMD:

“AMD64 processors like the AMD Opteron and upcoming AMD Athlon 64 processors are compatible with today’s hardware and software and smooth the transition to the next crucial step in the evolution of the personal computer, workstation, server, and supercomputing cluster.”
While delayed, Microsoft’s 64-bit Operating System will carry Athlon64/Opteron to even higher Performance levels. There are also other 64-bit alternatives like Linux, which are not delayed, and who now have a platform opportunity to really grow as the 64-bit alternative. Time will tell if these other players will have any real impact on the 64-bit market. To make launch even more intriguing, we are also seeing many reports that another Athlon64, geared to the Enthusiast community, clocked higher, and an ever better performer, may also emerge on September 23rd.

These all look like good omens for AMD, and after a very long wait, it’s about time!!

Content Creation and General Usage Performance Commentary
Comments Locked

79 Comments

View All Comments

  • Anonymous User - Sunday, September 7, 2003 - link

    There are TPC benchmarks out with the new Opteron ship running 64-bit Linux and has gotten very good performance indeed.

    http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/tpch_perf_results....

    IBMs xSeries 325 is sporting an Opteron.
  • Wesley Fink - Sunday, September 7, 2003 - link

    #66 -
    The Opteron and nForce3 require Registered ECC or Registered non-ECC dimms which are not the same as the unbuffered dimms we normally use for testing. It is very hard right now to find Registered dimms, let alone registered DDR400 dimms (the fastest ECC chips in current production are apparently designed for DDR333). The ONLY memory we had available that would work on the nForce3 were 512MB Registered ECC DDR400 modules. Dula-Channel makes that a megabyte. The theory goes that ECC and Registered slow down memory performance a bit compared to unbuffered, which should certainly offset any advantage.

    Our benchmark tests are cumulative, as we certainly can't keep rigs up for every board we test. With a new setup like this and cross-platform data, we sometimes have to compare what we can get to what we already have.

    Socket 754 will be single-channel and able to use regular unbuffered memory, while Socket 940 is dual-channel and requires Registered memory. The rumored Socket 939, scheduled for year-end, will allow use of standard unbuffered memory.
  • Locutus4657 - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link

    #27 Markets don't lie?? I remember when Rambuses stock was selling at $300/share and was rated BUY BUY BUY. If you're buying your tech prices based on stock values you are in some very seriouse trouble. And just so you know, I've built many an AMD system my self, and only the old "Super 7" systems had any real quirks. The newer Athlons have been problem free for me.
  • Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link

    #58 - hey i hadn't noticed that before. wesley, what's up with 1gb on the Athlon64/Opteron adn only 512mb on the P4???
  • Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link

    Some of you guys are so remarkably shortsighted it's not even funny. Posts like "haha, AMD still makes the crappier chip, they'll be out of business by this time next year" are foolish.

    If you like Intel, good for you, a strong AMD keeps intel's prices down and keeps the innovation coming. No AMD means we'll probably be paying $1200 for the 3.6 Ghz prescott this time next year, because they won't have to release as often or as cheaply.

    Kudos to AMD, and I wish them nothing but the best.
  • Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link

    low voltage Itaniums may be lower in performance to their big Madison sisters, but they blow everything else out of the water on some industry standard SPEC scores!
  • Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link

    Could it be that Registered DDR400 ECC Modules are as rare as the Athlon XP 2800+ that was paper launched at 2.25 GHz actual and then jumped quickly to a Barton 2800+ at 2.08 GHz? Or could it be that this is the same misleading stuff that AMD tried to do with their PriceWaterHouseCoopers benchmarks when they used the top of the line nForce platform against a mainstream Intel 845G platform and disabled Hyperthreading saying that it made the P4 slower - on top of that they used software patches that "aren't available for public download" to run their benchmarks on 3-year old benchmark software that was not optimized for the P4. If you look at what AMD has been saying for the past 5 years, they typically overpromise and underdeliver (a.k.a. Athlon FX - remarked Opteron now that Athlon64 will not be able to compete in it's original single-channel design) whereas Intel usually just stays pretty quiet, conservatively underpromises and overdelivers.
  • Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link

    hey all you guys clamoring for linux benchmarks, speak up and mention some good ones for them to run...
  • Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link

    I don't know why people are getting so emotional about intel vs amd. Let there be competition so we the consumers win. If Athlon xp hadn't been so powerful we wouldd not have 3.2 ghz, ht pentium 4 right now. On the other hand if we didn't have a 3.2 ghz p4 there would not be an upcoming athlon 64 fx. The chips with dual channel memory were all supposed to be in the server/workstation market. AMD has realised that the socket 754 chip will not be competitive enough with upcoming prescott and as such has created a new socket 939. I suspect that the socket 754 will go the way of the duron as a celeron competitor while socket 939 will be the flagship chip.
    Regarding the article the reviewer should have made it clear that this was an athlon 64-fx preview not athlon 64.
  • Anonymous User - Saturday, September 6, 2003 - link

    The low voltage itaniums are also low performance.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now