AMD Athlon 64 FX-57: The Fastest Single Core
by Derek Wilson on June 27, 2005 11:47 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Multitasking Content Creation
MCC Winstone 2004Multimedia Content Creation Winstone 2004 tests the following applications in various usage scenarios:
. Adobe® Photoshop® 7.0.1
. Adobe® Premiere® 6.50
. Macromedia® Director MX 9.0
. Macromedia® Dreamweaver MX 6.1
. Microsoft® Windows MediaTM Encoder 9 Version 9.00.00.2980
. NewTek's LightWave® 3D 7.5b
. SteinbergTM WaveLabTM 4.0f
As you can see above, Lightwave is part of the MCC Winstone 2004 benchmark suite. As an individual application, Lightwave does manage to get a healthy performance benefit with multithreaded rendering enabled, especially when paired with Hyperthreading enabled CPUs like the Pentium 4s here today. All chips were tested with Lightwave set to spawn 4 threads.
ICC SYSMark 2004
The first category that we will deal with is 3D Content Creation. The tests that make up this benchmark are described below:
"The user renders a 3D model to a bitmap using 3ds max 5.1, while preparing web pages in Dreamweaver MX. Then the user renders a 3D animation in a vector graphics format."
Next, we have 2D Content Creation performance:
"The user uses Premiere 6.5 to create a movie from several raw input movie cuts and sound cuts and starts exporting it. While waiting on this operation, the user imports the rendered image into Photoshop 7.01, modifies it and saves the results. Once the movie is assembled, the user edits it and creates special effects using After Effects 5.5."
The Internet Content Creation suite is rounded up with a Web Publishing performance test:
"The user extracts content from an archive using WinZip 8.1. Meanwhile, he uses Flash MX to open the exported 3D vector graphics file. He modifies it by including other pictures and optimizes it for faster animation. The final movie with the special effects is then compressed using Windows Media Encoder 9 series in a format that can be broadcast over broadband Internet. The web site is given the final touches in Dreamweaver MX and the system is scanned by VirusScan 7.0."
Mozilla + Media Encoder
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
56 Comments
View All Comments
yacoub - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link
Er, instead of "in the time a 2.8Ghz chip can", let's clarify and say "in a single clock cycle than a 2.8Ghz chip can".manno - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link
I heard it has support for DDR I 533, any chance we can see some benches with that stuff slapped in it?yacoub - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link
So is this graph an example of where pure clock speed determines performance?http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd%20athlon%20...
And why is that? What about that test seems to be extremely tied to the pure "speed" of the chip? Is it a matter of a 3.8GHz chip being able to process 1,000,000,000 more instructions through it in the time a 2.8GHz chip can?
ultimatebob - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link
Why are you still doing Mozilla 1.4 testing? Almost no one uses Mozilla anymore, they use Firefox.Besides... the explanation of why you're still using it (posted below) doesn't make much sense. You might want to reword it.
"Quite possibly the most frequently used application on any desktop is the one we pay the least amount of attention to when it comes to performance. While a bit older than the core that is now used in Firefox, performance in Mozilla is worth looking at as many users are switching from IE to a much more capable browser on the PC - Firefox."
The DvD - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link
1) What's up with the Communication Sysmark Business Application Performance bench?2) Why list the Gallating 3.46EE? It's not for sale..
3) Good work on the review.
dougSF30 - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link
Why didn't you guys test the DDR-533 memory divider support that comes with the FX-57? That would provide a nice boost in many scores.http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/27/amd_fx-57/
"AMD has upgraded the chip's integrated memory controller to work with 533MHz DDR SDRAM. Its predecessor, the FX-55, was limited to 400MHz memory."
phaxmohdem - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link
Yes way too pricey. AMD's latest round of pricings has me questioning their business direction. WTF? What happened to undercutting intel and giving teh end user a sweet deal?Starglider - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link
It is surprising that the processor wasn't stable at 3GHz, as every other FX-57 review I've read where overclocking was attempted achieved 3GHz stable on air (and in one case 3.5 GHz stable on phase-change). As Kocur suggests, perhaps this was a motherboard issue?Agree with the conclusion though.
AndreasM - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link
Loose, as in not tight.Lose, as in not win.
Page 1
finbarqs - Monday, June 27, 2005 - link
hrm.. is it based on the .09 micron process? Why is it clocked so poorly? is the San Diego core FX-55 better?