Standard Performance Test Configuration

If you are interested in more information comparing AMD (x2) and Intel (Pentium D) Dual-Core processors, LGA 775 Prescott, Athlon 64, P4, and P4EE, please see our in-depth comparisons in the recent reviews:

AMD Athlon 64 FX-57: The Fastest Single Core
Athlon Dual Core: Overclocking the 4200+
Intel's Pentium 4 670: Just Another Speed Bump
AMD's Athlon 64 X2 4800+ & 4200+ Dual Core Performance Preview
AMD's Sempron 3300+: 90nm Budget Computing
Dual Core Intel Platform Shootout - NVIDIA nForce4 vs. Intel 955X
Intel Dual Core Performance Preview Part II: A Deeper Look
Intel Dual Core Performance Preview Part I: First Encounter
Intel Pentium 4 6xx and 3.73EE: Favoring Features Over Performance
Intel's Pentium 4 570J - Will 3.8GHz do the trick?
Pentium 4 3.46 Extreme Edition and 925XE: 1066MHz FSB Support is Here
AMD Athlon 64 4000+ & FX-55: A Thorough Investigation
Intel 925X: Exploring the Overclock Lock
Intel's 925X & LGA-775: Are Prescott 3.6 and PCI Express Graphics any Faster?
Intel 925X/915: Chipset Performance & DDR2
Socket 939 Chipsets: Motherboard Performance & PCI/AGP Locks
AMD Athlon 64 3800+ and FX-53: The First 939 CPUs
Intel's Pentium 4 E: Prescott Arrives with Luggage

 Performance Test Configuration
Processor(s): AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (2.4GHz) Socket 939
RAM: 2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev. 2
Hard Drive(s): Seagate 120GB 7200 RPM SATA (8MB Buffer)
Video AGP & IDE Bus Master Drivers: NVIDIA nForce 6.56
Video Cards: NVIDIA 6800 Ultra (PCIe)
NVIDIA 6800 Ultra (AGP)
Video Drivers: NVIDIA nForce 71.89
Operating System(s): Windows XP Professional SP2
Direct X 9.0c
Motherboards: Abit AN8 Fatal1ty
Biostar NF4UL-A9
Chaintech VNF4-Ultra
DFI LANParty UT nF4 Ultra-D
ECS KN1 Extreme
Epox 9NPA+
Winfast NF4UK8AA (Foxconn)

Tests used OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev. 2, which incorporates Samsung TCCD chips. These same chips are available in memory modules from G. Skill, Corsair, Geil, Mushkin, PQI and others. Please refer to Athlon 64 Memory: Rewriting the Rules for more information on Athlon 64 memory performance.

All boards were tested with the NVIDIA 6800 Ultra PCI Express video card, which is a very good match to the nForce4 Ultra chipset. Since the Biostar NF4 UL-A9 also supported an AGP slot, we ran comparison benchmarks with an NVIDIA 6800 Ultra AGP video card. Our past tests have shown performance of the AGP-8x and PCIe 688 Ultra to be virtually identical. This allowed us to gage the performance hit of the Biostar AGP configuration, which is derived from PCI/PCIe and not a true AGP 8X slot.

All game benchmarks were run in 1280x1024 video mode without Anti-Aliasing and Anisotropic filtering wherever possible. Some benchmarks, like Aquamark 3, use a standardized 1024x768 setup to generate comparable benchmark results. A few other benchmarks have AA or AF turned on by default, but since we are using the same benchmark setup for comparison, the usefulness of the benchmark for comparison is not compromised.

Winfast NF4UK8AA (Foxconn): Overclocking and Stress Testing General Performance and Encoding
Comments Locked

75 Comments

View All Comments

  • Zebo - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    Does ECS build EPOX's boards? just curious because they look pretty cheap like ECS IMO..
  • Heidfirst - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    "[b]#19 and Others - I'm sure you must have noticed that some web sites have never posted a negative review of an Abit board. Also water cooling and asynchronous ram is hardly comparable to our air-cooled tests.

    The first thing I did was check other reviewers and users of the Abit board. The great majority are running into problems at about 250 FSB - although a few are getting better performance. Abit has had so many complaints about the OC performance of this board that I would fully expect a hardware revision on the horizon.[/b]"
    Well the Fatality AN8 SLi, AN8 SLi, AN8 Ultra, AN8 V2.0 & AN8-V are effectively the new revision as I pointed out. Why buy a Fatality AN8 when the AN8 Ultra has better Vcore, better sound & is cheaper?
    & people have had HTT395 & DDR660 out of them on air ...
  • Heidfirst - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

  • Wesley Fink - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    #19 and Others - I'm sure you must have noticed that some web sites have never posted a negative review of an Abit board. Also water cooling and asynchronous ram is hardly comparable to our air-cooled tests.

    The first thing I did was check other reviewers and users of the Abit board. The great majority are running into problems at about 250 FSB - although a few are getting better performance. Abit has had so many complaints about the OC performance of this board that I would fully expect a hardware revision on the horizon.

    Abit set the expectation that the AN8 Fatal1ty was the best of the best with a price tag to match. It's an interesting board with many interesting features, but it's performance as it now stands is nowhere near the best.
  • TheGlassman - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    I think that a round up such as this would serve the readers better if three types of memory were used and various dividers used.
    My Chaintech VnF4 is running at 256x11 quite happilly, so I know it will run well over 245 with a divider with my memory, and I'm sure most of the other boards as well. And yes, many people run it over 300 HTT with lower multi cpu's.
    This is not to say that 1:1 testing is not important, but since this is a round up, the various needs and budgets of your readers should be taken into account.
    Seeing bios's used that are dated during the testing, with a known single memory may if repeated cause readers to think that Anandtech doesn't deserve it's well earned reputation as a fair and complete tester of all things important to PC ethusiasts.
    Using memories with 3 different types of chips and using relevant dividers to find maximum HTT's and cpu speeds with each, while being more work, I think will be worth while to your readers, especially in a round up where boards are compared directly to each other.
    This current round up implies that most nF4 boards are not capable of high HTT's, but the truth is you have only shown that most do not run one type of memory at very high speeds. You have not exposed the limits of the boards, nor do we know if the situation is the same with any of the other commonly used memories.
  • bldckstark - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    Xpose-
    Not too early. I don't have my board yet. I have been waiting on X2. Using your same logic that means that nobody has a board yet right? I mean, since I am the only person I know that is going to build a A64 system soon then I should assume that nobody has one.
    Geez
  • xpose - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    This Editor's Recommendation for best motherboard is at least 3 months too late. We already have had all of our boards.

    Also, to say that the VN4F Ultra is a bad overclocking board is completely wrong. I have a 3000+ CPU running at 2.67gz now. That is about 49% OC and damn good reguardless of the MB.
  • Son of a N00b - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    great article! you can clearly see the hours of hard work you put into it. Great Job, I enjoyed it and it was jam packed with info.

    one quuestion though where was the gugabyte board ultra board?? sure you may have reviewed it in the SLI roundup, but then did you not do the same with DFI? Plus you had great results with the reference gigabyte board, but not the revision 1 board...i'd like to see how ir fairs now...maybe i missed something why you reviewed the DFI board again becuase I am not familiar witha ll their variations and naming scheme, but to me it looked the same...why review that one and not the others? sure its great to rehash what a great board the DFi one is but....

    just wondering as I have always had great success with gigabyte boards...but i probably missed something even thought i read it back to front, sorry if i did as i know that you would never do something without a good reason behind it...

    anyway thanks, keep the awesome articles rolling...
  • smn198 - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    Hi Wesley, thanks for the clarification on the HTT. do you know if it would have any more of an impact when dual core is brought into the equation?

    Thanks again. Good article BTW!
  • BigandSlimey - Wednesday, July 6, 2005 - link

    #18 I really like that idea, would probably be a headache to make it and keep it updated though.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now