Doom 3: CPU Battlegrounds - Guess who wins it ;)

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,393
8,552
126
its almost as if AMD's P-ratings are based off of Doom3 as its benchmark...
 

AmdEmAll

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2000
6,698
9
81
absolute domination

Makes me want to upgrade to a clawhammer finally.
 

viivo

Diamond Member
May 4, 2002
3,345
32
91
You have to feel at least some pity for the new Celeron. Poor little thing.
 

jrphoenix

Golden Member
Feb 29, 2004
1,295
2
81
Where is peteroy? I enjoyed reading his posts about how Intel is faster than anything AMD can make, quite humorous.:laugh:
 

SonicIce

Diamond Member
Apr 12, 2004
4,771
0
76
Originally posted by: FullRoast
Anyone else surprised that the 3400+ (socket 754) beat out the 3500+ (socket 939)?

Not really, becasue Anandtech said that Doom 3 is really dependant on cashe sizes. If they used the ClawHammer 3400+ (1MB L2 cashe), that might be faster than the 3500+ (512KB L2 cashe).

But what about the Newcastle 3400+?:confused:
 

JBT

Lifer
Nov 28, 2001
12,094
1
81
Originally posted by: FullRoast
Anyone else surprised that the 3400+ (socket 754) beat out the 3500+ (socket 939)?

no it beats it in quit ea few things. Also the 3400 in that test was the claw hammer core with more cache.
 

Bumrush99

Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2004
3,334
194
106
Freaking awesome display of power by AMD. The Athlon 64 3000+ nearly beats the P4 3.2EE!!
 

amdguy

Banned
Jun 23, 2004
529
0
0
my crystal ball foresee the Intel moroncutives and morongineers having a heated board meeting pointing fingers
 

FullRoast

Senior member
Oct 11, 1999
337
0
0
Originally posted by: JBT
Originally posted by: FullRoast
Anyone else surprised that the 3400+ (socket 754) beat out the 3500+ (socket 939)?

no it beats it in quit ea few things. Also the 3400 in that test was the claw hammer core with more cache.


You're right. I missed that it was a Clawamer 3400+. According to the AMD numbers from the article, there is a 2.6% benefit for dual channel (a plus for the 3500+) and a 3.6% benefit for 1 MB cache over 512 KB cache (a plus for the 3400+ Clawhammer). Using the frame rate for the 3500+ from the chart and doing the math,

94.7 fps * 0.974 (adj. for single channel 3400+) * 1.036 (adj for 3400+ 1 MB cache) = 95.5, fps for the 3400+

The math works. Guess I thought about this one too much! :)
 

alexruiz

Platinum Member
Sep 21, 2001
2,836
556
126
Not a surprise given the fact that the K8 has a superior architecture (on die memory controller and HT) I am curious to know how the 32 bits Doom3 would perform in the latest beta of WinXP for AMD64.... :p

HardOCP reported something similar crowning the FX-53 as the ultimate CPU for D3. Now what AMD needs is to fully support DDR500 or better.... no need for DDR-II yet.
 

dguy6789

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2002
8,558
3
76
a 2400+ was never top of the line, it was always out dated, it released simultaneously with the 2600+