Performance in Synthetic Benchmarks
As usual, we will first run our synthetic benchmarks.
The SiSoftware 2007 suite features an updated enhanced-functionality interface, runs on three platforms (Windows x86, Windows x64, WinCE ARM), contains 13 tests and 34 informational modules, and supports a large range of hardware devices thanks to the developer’s collaboration with Intel, AMD, ATI, SiS and VIA. The program is supported in six languages and has a free Lite version for personal use and educational purposes. SiSoftware Sandra measures the overall performance of the system as well as that of each of its subsystems.
PCMark benchmarks computer’s performance in office and office-related applications and also produces performance scores for the main subsystems (CPU, memory, graphical, and disk subsystem). PCMark 2005 carries on the tradition of complex benchmarks of the series and uses fragments of real-life applications as tests. This makes it somewhat more relevant for end-users as opposed to fully synthetic benchmarks. After running a series of 11 tests on the different components of the system, the program calculates an overall performance score in units called PCMarks. PCMark 2005 can check a computer out at processing HD video and encoding audio, and offers enhanced tests of the CPU and hard disk under multithreaded load. The overall score is calculated by the formula: PCMark Score = 87 x (the geometric mean of the basic tests), where the geometric mean is calculated as (Result 1 x Result 2 x…) divided by the number of results.
PCMark Vantage is the first synthetic benchmarking suite developed for Vista. It contains more tests than the previous versions of the benchmark.
The CPU tests suggest that the Penryn core is faster than the Merom when powered by the mains. When the notebooks switch to their batteries, their CPU clock rates drop to 1.2GHz and SiSoftware Sandra 2007 can see but a small difference between them. The CPU frequency is cut in half due to Intel’s power-saving technologies (frequency throttling together with Enhanced SpeedStep and others). We can’t see any trace of FSB Frequency Switching technology, though. The memory tests indicate that it’s better to have two 2GB sticks than two 1GB ones. Oddly enough, the identical HDDs deliver different results in the disk subsystem tests. Our prediction about the contest between the GeForce 9500M GS and GeForce 8600M GT seems to come true even though we haven’t yet got to serious gaming tests.
The new version of SYSMark is intended to reveal a system’s performance under different types of load. It simulates a user who is solving practical tasks in a few popular applications. The benchmark issues a few ratings that are indicative of the system performance under different loads.
The E-Learning test emulates the creation of an educational website with diverse media content. This script makes use of the following applications: Adobe Illustrator CS2, Adobe Photoshop CS2, Macromedia Flash 8 and Microsoft PowerPoint 2003. The Video Creation scenario is about creating video clips using special effects. The clips are combined out of several sources, including static images. The result is prepared in two formats: HD and for online viewing. The following software is utilized here: Adobe After Effects 7, Adobe Illustrator CS2, Adobe Photoshop CS2, Microsoft Windows Media Encoder 9, and Sony Vegas 7. The next test, Productivity, emulates typical office activities such as sending e-mail, processing data, managing a project, working with documents. Applications employed: Microsoft Excel 2003, Microsoft Outlook 2003, Microsoft PowerPoint 2003, Microsoft Word 2003, Microsoft Project 2003, and WinZip 10.0. And finally, the 3D script from SYSMark 2007 is about creating an architectural presentation including a photorealistic image of the building and a clip with a flyby of it. Two applications are used: AutoDesk 3ds Max 8 and SketchUp 5.
The CPU-dependent SYSmark 2007 doesn’t tell us anything new about the relative performance of the two CPUs. The new 45nm core is obviously faster in each test. Its advantage is not overwhelming, yet noticeable. The only exception is the Productivity test which depends on the performance of the hard disk and graphics subsystem. This test is won by the G1S. When the notebooks are working on their batteries, their performance drops twofold due to the power-saving measures.