Performance

Synthetic Benchmarks: PCMark05, 3DMark06 and ScienceMark 2.0

First of all we decided to test the performance of our processors in popular synthetic benchmarks.

Although PCMark05 is not a very objective test, it is still quite popular. The results we obtain here rank the CPUs according to their price point. The performance of Athlon 64 X2 3800+ appears right between the results obtained on Pentium D 920 and Pentium D 930. However, the performance of Intel’s overclocked dual-core fellows has an impressive influence on PCMark05 results. Presler based CPUs working at 4.0GHz frequency leave AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 behind in no time.

3DMark06 results are very similar to what we have just seen on the previous diagram. At least when it comes to overclocked processors’ performance. As for the results obtained in the nominal mode, Athlon 64 X2 3800+ manages to catch up with Pentium D 930 here. In other words, 3DMark06 puts the youngest AMD Athlon 64 X2 processor in a better position compared to the first Pentium D models from the price-to-performance point of view.

The same conclusion can be drawn from the CPU benchmark from the same testing suite. Once again the overclocked Pentium D CPUs leave Athlon 64 FX-60 behind. However, when it comes to the nominal speeds, the results are no longer that impressive.

The competitor solutions based on K8 architecture are definitely faster than the rivals in scientific computational tasks. According to ScienceMark 2.0, the performance of Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is higher than that of Pentium D 920 and Pentium D 930. Overclocking also doesn’t help Intel processors to catch up with Athlon 64 FX-60.