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

[Arsynic]

Hahahaha...all of you who dissed the PrescHOT got own3d! It spanked the Northwood in Doom 3.

 

[newb54]

Originally posted by: Arsynic
Hahahaha...all of you who dissed the PrescHOT got own3d! It spanked the Northwood in Doom 3.

Except most of the people "dissing" prescott were recommending Athlon 64s.

 

[SonicIce]

Looks like AMD is the cats meow. But man this is the worst ive seen inten beaten by AMD, usually its a closer battle.

 

[Adul]

so who's buy an athlon 64 for doom 3

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Arsynic
Hahahaha...all of you who dissed the PrescHOT got own3d! It spanked the Northwood in Doom 3.

I still can't believe the Prescott won. I mean, did Hell come to Earth or something?

 

[DGath]

Originally posted by: jrphoenix
Where is peteroy? I enjoyed reading his posts about how Intel is faster than anything AMD can make, quite humorous.:laugh:

Intel is faster, in some benchmarks, so he's right and wrong. People are actually suprised by AMD owning Doom3? The 64s always perform better for games than the intels. Doesn't mean they're a better processor, take a look at sysmark or especially divx scores to see AMD get beat-down. General rule of thumb, AMDs good for gaming, Intels good for non-gaming.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Originally posted by: DGath

Originally posted by: jrphoenix
Where is peteroy? I enjoyed reading his posts about how Intel is faster than anything AMD can make, quite humorous.:laugh:

Intel is faster, in some benchmarks, so he's right and wrong. People are actually suprised by AMD owning Doom3? The 64s always perform better for games than the intels. Doesn't mean they're a better processor, take a look at sysmark or especially divx scores to see AMD get beat-down. General rule of thumb, AMDs good for gaming, Intels good for non-gaming.

Now the A64 beats the P4 in every benchmark, including media encoding.

 

[RussianSensation]

AMD is definately a fast processor no doubt. If anyone wants to upgrade soon, it is definately the way to go. It will be interesting to see how well AMD and Intel dual core processors stack up with one another in 2005 though.

But what I noticed the most was this:

A64 3400+ and 6800Ultra
@ 1280x1024 (High Detail) ~ 80.4 fps

Similarly,
P4 2.4C and 6800Ultra
@ 1280x1024 (High Detail) ~ 60.4 fps

P4 3.4EE and 9800Pro
@ 1280x1024 (Medium Detail) ~ 32fps

In fact even with AXP 2000+ and 6800Ultra @1280x1024 (High Detail) results in 46.1fps

So CPU performance IS important without a doubt. But even pairing a slow cpu with the fastest gpu resulted in a much better gaming experience than pairing one of the fastest cpus with the last generation high-end card. Of course once AA/AF are enabled, the cpu importance is even less drastic. Anyone who will benefit from a faster cpu will most likely play at <= 1280x1024 (suggesting his/her videocard is not a new generation card). And anyone with a high-end card will play at 1600x1200 and some quality settings enabled, at which point anything after P4 2.4C is going to be hardly noticeable. Considering almost everyone here praises the new GPUs and either already owns one or will buy one in the future, I always question the importance in the lead of A64 at gaming. Heck, If i had the new generation of cards I would not play anything below 1600x1200 to start with. The recent poll at Futuremark showed that the majority of gamers still play at 1024x768 which again boggles my mind. Is it that most gamers are just too lazy to change the resolution and since most videogames are defaulted at 1024x768 they just play it at that and get used to it? Then most people argue that with higher resolutions things get smaller when you play; but with most games (esp. FPS) that is not the case (except for menu screens I suppose).

I am not saying that I dont acknowledge that AMD is a better cpu for gaming and office apps, but maybe the importance everyone puts into owing an AMD cpu for gaming is rather exaggerated. Surely A64/FX + 6800Ultra will give you the best Doom 3 gaming experience. But is spending $150-200 on a new A64 cpu + $80-120 on a new A64 motherboard to pair it with worth it to get extra 20-25% improvement in gaming at lower resolutions, if spending $400 on a 6800GT card gives you 70-100% improvement? I suppose if you are on a budget, the answer is a no, especially if you have anything at or above 2.4C/2500+xp. But then again, the beauty of anandtechers is that they are ready to sell an arm and a leg to have the latest and fastest hardware.

 

[mechBgon]

:Q

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: magomago
go skt754 sempr0n!

Man talk about a suprise!

Fixed

 

[jpeyton]

If you have a 6800U, you'll be playing at 16x12, and you'll be GPU limited, not CPU limited.

 

[Adul]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Arsynic
Hahahaha...all of you who dissed the PrescHOT got own3d! It spanked the Northwood in Doom 3.

I still can't believe the Prescott won. I mean, did Hell come to Earth or something?

no, just doom 3 did.

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Was there any doubt that AMD would be winning these benchmarks? It's been established for awhile already that the K8 architecture is more suited to gaming than Netburst.

I can't believe the replies in this thread and how attached people are to a specific company; maybe someone should make a thread showing off some Lightwave/media encoding benchmarks so that Intel fanboys can show off their huge e-penis. :roll:

edit: Just so that the fanboys don't flame me, I own computers with both AMD and Intel CPUs; I ambivalent towards the companies and buy what processor suits my needs best.

StrangerGuy

Now the A64 beats the P4 in every benchmark, including media encoding.

Really? Kind of like in this benchmark here? Text
or how about Lightwave and 3DS Max? Text

 

[SonicIce]

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
Was there any doubt that AMD would be winning these benchmarks? It's been established for awhile already that the K8 architecture is more suited to gaming than Netburst.

I can't believe the replies in this thread and how attached people are to a specific company; maybe someone should make a thread showing off some Lightwave/media encoding benchmarks so that Intel fanboys can show off their huge e-penis. :roll:

edit: Just so that the fanboys don't flame me, I own computers with both AMD and Intel CPUs; I ambivalent towards the companies and buy what processor suits my needs best.

StrangerGuy

Now the A64 beats the P4 in every benchmark, including media encoding.

Really? Kind of like in this benchmark here? Text
or how about Lightwave and 3DS Max? Text

Isn't AMD faster in everything now thanks to socket 939?
http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=2128&amp;p=15
Anandtech: "The difference between top systems from AMD and Intel is now less than 3% with Divx, which can be considered equivalent."

And thats the only benchmark that intel won, the rest are AMD.

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Originally posted by: SonicIce
Isn't AMD faster in everything now thanks to socket 939?

Look at the benchies, in both cases the P4 560 (3.6 GHz) beats the AMD's 3800+ (Socket 939) in a very similar fashion to the way that the 3800+ smacks the 560 around in gaming benchies.

People on these boards make it sound like the A64 is God's gift to x86 and that the P4 isn't worth the silicon it's made of. The edge in performance really depends on the applications you want to run; at this point the A64 wins more categories than the P4, but that hardly makes the P4 useless.

edit: FYI, the encoding test that your benchmark shows isn't the same as the one in mine, which explains the difference in performance. If you read the comments however, you see that Anand specifically chose the new benchmark so that neither platform is advantaged. AutoGK actually does much more than just straight encoding, FWIW.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

RaynorWolfcastle,

You are exactly right, but your logic is wasted on most the members here. I swear this place is turning into AMDMB v2.0 Intel is in the drivers seat everywhere but in the tech junkie demographic, so their perception is irrelevant, while Intel market share and profit margins most certainly are not.

I do have to say that Intel has some work to do or some day AMD will wake up and start effectively marketing their products costing Intc market&amp;mind share.

 

[Delorian]

Party On AMD, Party On NVIDIA!

:beer: for all!

 

[mikecel79]

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.

DDR500 is not going to be a JEDEC standard. They officially stopped at DDR400. Very slim chance that AMD will support that speed unless it's standardized. There wasn't going to be a DDR400 but Intel pushed for it so they could have dual channel DDR400 to match the speeds of their 800Mhz FSB. Besides AMD would need to redesign the memory controller which would mean a new verison of the K8 chip family.

 

[mikecel79]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
RaynorWolfcastle,

You are exactly right, but your logic is wasted on most the members here. I swear this place is turning into AMDMB v2.0 Intel is in the drivers seat everywhere but in the tech junkie demographic, so their perception is irrelevant, while Intel market share and profit margins most certainly are not.

I do have to say that Intel has some work to do or some day AMD will wake up and start effectively marketing their products costing Intc market&amp;mind share.

So true!

 

[Bassyhead]

awesome

 

[SonicIce]

Originally posted by: Delorian
Party On AMD, Party On NVIDIA!

:beer: for all!

I'll drink to that :beer:. Unless its the 9800pro, then party on ATI

 

[XBoxLPU]

* loves his AMD64 3000*

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
If you have a 6800U, you'll be playing at 16x12, and you'll be GPU limited, not CPU limited.

Exactly, and same will hold true with every other videocard for now. But I just dont understand how everyone with these high end cards keeps saying that A64 gaming performance is so important, when P4/XP and A64 will perform almost the same in high resolutions. At the same time, why buy a new generation videocard and not play with it at high resolutions and with quality settings enabled?

That is my question.

 

[NYHoustonman]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
a 2400+ was never top of the line, it was always out dated, it released simultaneously with the 2600+

Just because it was never top of the line doesn't mean it's automatically been outdated (outdated='low end' to me, not 'not top of the line'). It still runs Doom 3 at 1280x1024medium, so I'm fine for a lil while, I just didn't realize how massively far behind it really was.

 

[alexruiz]

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
Was there any doubt that AMD would be winning these benchmarks? It's been established for awhile already that the K8 architecture is more suited to gaming than Netburst.

I can't believe the replies in this thread and how attached people are to a specific company; maybe someone should make a thread showing off some Lightwave/media encoding benchmarks so that Intel fanboys can show off their huge e-penis. :roll:

edit: Just so that the fanboys don't flame me, I own computers with both AMD and Intel CPUs; I ambivalent towards the companies and buy what processor suits my needs best.

StrangerGuy

Now the A64 beats the P4 in every benchmark, including media encoding.

Really? Kind of like in this benchmark here? Text
or how about Lightwave and 3DS Max? Text

Try to encode whatever you want in whatever format you feel using a commercial application (Ulead VideoStudio or Roxio videowave) and tell me what happens.... In fact, try to encode to DV (the most used
codec at consumer level because of digital camcorders) using Ulead and tell me who wins. The applications/codecs/containers where AMD beats intel in video encoding are 2:1 in favor of AMD. Obviously, when most of the internet sites show XMPEG encoding DivX you think the P4 is unstoppable. Do the same DivX encoding in DVD2AVI or virtualdubmod and tell me who wins...... If you encode DivX with XMPEG and MPEG with TMPGEnc, then the P4 is for you. If you use something different then the K8 is your solution.

Don't contribute to the myth that the P4 is better for media encoding because that is not true. It wins if the application if heavily optimized for SSE2/HT. Fortunately, most of the applications focus more on features than optimizations for the P4, so my K8 is unstopabble creating titles, adding transitions or layering clips. I will believe the P4 is better when it wins the majority of video encoding tasks, not just the XMPEG+DiVx or WM9..... But when it gets beaten encoding MPEG2 in CCE or encoding sorenson in quicktime or encoding Xvid in virtualdub then you know that is not the case.


Alex