CrossFire Xpress 3200: RD580 for AM2
by Wesley Fink on June 1, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Test Setup
| Performance Test Configuration - ATI CrossFire Xpress 3200 AM2 | |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (AM2) (2.4GHz, 1MB Cache per core) |
| RAM: | 2 x 1GB Corsair Twin2x2048-8500C5 DDR2-800 at (CL3-3-3-13 2T) |
| Hard Drive(s): | 1 x Hitachi 250GB SATA2 enabled (8MB Buffer) |
| System Platform Drivers: | None - LAN, Audio, SMBus drivers as required |
| Video Cards: | 1 x ATI X1900XT - All Standard Tests 1 x EVGA 7900GTX - All Standard Tests 2 x ATI x1900XT (Master+Standard) - CrossFire |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 6.4 |
| Cooling: | AMD FX62 Heatpipe AM2 Cooler |
| Power Supply: | OCZ PowerStream 520W |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| Performance Test Configuration - Foxconn C51XEM2AA | |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (AM2) (2.4GHz, 1MB Cache per core) |
| RAM: | 2 x 1GB Corsair Twin2x2048-8500C5 DDR2-800 at (CL3-3-3-13 2T) |
| Hard Drive(s): | 1 x Maxtor 300GB SATA2 (16MB Buffer) |
| System Platform Drivers: | NVIDIA 9.34 |
| Video Cards: | 1 x EVGA 7900GTX - All Tests 2 x EVGA 7900GTX for SLI Tests |
| Video Drivers: | NVIDIA 91.27 |
| Cooling: | Zalman CNPS9500 AM2 |
| Power Supply: | OCZ GameXStream 700W |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| Performance Test Configuration - Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe | |
| Processor: | AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+ (S939) (2.4GHz, 1MB Cache per core) |
| RAM: | 2 x 1GB Crucial DDR500 at DDR-400 2-2-2-7 1T |
| Hard Drive(s): | 1 x Hitachi 250GB SATA2 enabled (8MB Buffer) |
| System Platform Drivers: | NVIDIA 6.85 |
| Video Cards: | 1 x EVGA 7900GTX - All Tests 2 x EVGA 7900GTX for SLI Tests |
| Video Drivers: | NVIDIA 84.21 |
| Cooling: | AMD FX-60 Heatpipe Cooler |
| Power Supply: | OCZ PowerStream 520W |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
To the extent possible, test conditions were maintained the same over the platforms tested. For better comparison standard test results (1280x1024) were run with both the ATI X1900 XT and the NVIDIA 7900 GTX. Since SLI and CrossFire are not yet interchangeable, 1600x1200 4xAA/8xAF single and SLI were run on the NVIDIA-based boards with 7900 GTX. 1600X1200 4xAA/8xAF were run on the ATI using an X1900 XT and X1900 CrossFire. All results are reported in our charts and color-coded for easier identification of results.
AM2 benchmarking used Corsair PC-8500 (DDR2-1066) 2GB kit at 3-3-3-13 timings at 2.2V. DDR benchmarks used a Crucial 2GB kit at the fastest available DDR400 2-2-2-7 timings. In recent months the memory market has moved from a 1GB kit to a 2BG kit being the common memory configuration. Our new DDR2 test standard will therefore be 2GB and we used the 2GB DDR memory for best comparison.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
71 Comments
View All Comments
Saist - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
to quote"short life for AM2 dominance before the launch of Conroe"
Um. Anandtech, if you actually do believe that Conroe's performance numbers are going to hold up in multithreaded applications that exceed 4megabytes of cache data, I think you need to redo you're calculations. After intel's showing of Conroe behind closed doors during E3, I think you should also be aware that the performance numbers are not adding up. Intel might finally be competitive, but even when Intel chips have been competitive in the past, AMD chips have won on price. AM2 may not be the only game in town come this fall, but to say it has a short life? Makes me wonder if you actually bothered even asking the game developers what they are getting out of the processors.
JarredWalton - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
...multithreaded applications that exceed 4megabytes of cache data..."We believe in real world testing. I'm sure there will be applicaitons where AMD still comes out ahead, but synthetic scenarios don't really count. If http://techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x...">Intel wins in encoding tests, 3D rendering, gaming, office... and loses in a few specific benchmarks that require lots of memory and low latency RAM access, does it really mean AMD is competitive? I mean, there are still a few specific scenarios where P4 can beat A64, but you don't see us trumpeting those as being representative.
What it comes down to is what most people will get out of each platform, and so far it's looking like a pretty clean sweep for Core Duo 2. Woodcrest vs. Opteron in HPC applications might be a different story (I doubt it), but that's really only relevant if you're running server workloads. As far as pricing, http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/1556_large_conr...">last I saw the $300+ prices of dual core AMD chips are going to have a difficult time competing with $185-$225 Intel chips. Overclocks are also looking promising as well, so a $185 chip running 2.8 GHz will be a force to be reconned with.
R3MF - Friday, June 2, 2006 - link
can you tell me the what and the when of this amzing revelation?Slaimus - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
You can run CrossFire on 975X as well. It should be a competitive platform once the new CPUs come out.
Axbattler - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
Umm, the article made no mention of the Sil3132 performance on the A8R32-MVP, which I believe is bugged.Trisped - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2767&am...">http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2767&am...First chart, #1 is the Silicon Image 3132 SATA2 (ATI) performance rating.
Axbattler - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
I saw that. But if you look at the second graph, the performance of the Sil 3132 in the MSI board is considerably worse than in the ATI reference board.That is still quite usable, but the one from the Asus A8R32-MVP is basically unusable (slower than what modern drives are capable).
Wesley Fink - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
We retested Sil3132 on the ATI and some other controllers for this review, and the other 3132 data should have been deleted. Now corrected. We are not aware of the 3132 issue with the A8R32-MVP. The Sil3132 is one of the best SATA2 controllers on the market, and it is a much better performer than the Sil3114.Axbattler - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
The result does shown in the review does suggest a solid performance from the Sil3132 controller. However, this is what I have been experiencing:- http://img267.imageshack.us/my.php?image=burst4dh....">http://img267.imageshack.us/my.php?image=burst4dh.... (Sil controller)
- http://img71.imageshack.us/my.php?image=burst27ja....">http://img71.imageshack.us/my.php?image=burst27ja.... (ULi controller)
Two motherboard bioses were tested (0311, 0404), as well as all the drivers from 1.0.9.0 (bundled with the motherboard installation CD, to the latest 1.0.16.0
The poor HDTach performance is reflected in real world application too, gaming loading, file copying are all slowed down to horrendous level.
I believe that Gary was able to replicate this issue (not sure if he eventually found a way around it), although I suppose that based on the result of the other board, it is an issue specific Asus board (perhaps the A8R32-MVP). Is there any chance you could run a test to confirm this?
Very few people in forums that I've visited use the Sil controller, perhaps due to the positioning of the SATA socket (which is actually optimal to where my Raptor is installed: on a 5.25" drive bay).
Trisped - Thursday, June 1, 2006 - link
ATI AM2.jpg is a bit blurry when blown up. You might want to set the camera on the highest quality setting so that doesn’t happen.0X looks like a typo
Why did the Audio Performance charts not have any NVIDIA solutions?