Here's the Pentium E2220 with only 1MB of cache. The full blown Core 2 Duos are much faster. Even at 3.2GHz this CPU can't quite match the 3.13GHz Opteron 185 in 3DMark01. It does pull ahead of the Opteron in 3DMark 2005 and 2006, however.

Win 7, stock (2.4GHz, 800MHz FSB)

Win7, overclocked (3.2GHz, 1066FSB)

Win XP, stock

Win XP, overclocked.

Im testing my year 2003 build I havnt yet built with an AGP card from the future.

On paper the Geforce 7800 GS from 2005 sucks. It uses a crippled G70 core with 6 vertex shaders and 16 pixel shaders down from 8/24 in the full G70. To make the card suck even more Nvidia decided that 375 MHz core and 600(1200) MHz memory was appropriate clocks, the end result was about even with a Geforce 6800 Ultra.

This card is faster, Gainward cheated by using a G71 core with 7 vertex shaders and 20 Pixel shaders activated. As if this wasnt enough they overclocked the card to 450 MHz core 625(1250) MHz memory. I had a feeling the card could do even higer clocks and I was right. I still dosnt know how high the card can go, I felt this was enough as its hot in my apartment this evening, I have 0 airflow over the card and the stock cooler looks crappy.

Opteron 248 (2P) @2330 MHz, MSI K8T Master2 FAR, 2x 1GB DDR ECC REG @166 Mhz CL2-3-3-7, Gainward Geforce 7800GS 512MB

3dmark 2001. I think PC3200 memory would improve the score.

3dmark 2003. In the reviews of the Geforce 7800GS (those I have read) they got ~13000P.

3dmark 2006. This might look slow, but it isnt when you think about how old the motherboard and CPUs are.

Here is the same 2P Opteron 248 system with a Geforce 6800 "Ultra"
The scores are not too bad 😀

3dmark 2001

3dmark 2003

3dmark 2006

Athlon 64 3700+ overclocked to 2.64GHz, GeForce FX 5200:

Here's the trash picked 775 system in its final configuration with a fresh install of Win7 x64:
Core 2 Quad Q6700 @ 3.33GHz/1333FSB (8MB L2), GeForce GTX 560 (341.44), 8GB DDR2-800 5-5-5, Asus P5N-E SLI (nForce 650i), X-Fi Ti, Win7 64.

this GPU deserved faster memory

Here's the Q6700 running Windows XP:

I learned an important lesson the other day: that pretty much any motherboard newer than Socket 939 can handle a 1T command rate with 4 DIMMs. For years I'd assumed that any system running more than two memory modules would require 2T timing for stability. I was dead wrong; this only seems to apply to S939 and the (possibly weak?) memory controller in K8 CPUs. Even my main system can handle running all 32GB of RAM at 1T. I had to reduce the memory speed to 2133MHz to pass memtest, but the reduced latency more than made up for the slower DRAM frequency.

Core i7 4930K @ 4.6GHz, GTX 970, 32GB at 2133MHz, 9-11-11-1T, 1.55V

Core 2 Quad Q6700 @ 3.33GHz, GTX 560, 8GB at 667MHz, 4-4-4-1T

I ran 3dmark with my new spare Asus CUSL2-C system.

The scores would be a little bit higher with AGP 4X but the BIOS forces AGP 2X when overclocking.

3dmark 99

3dmark 2000

3dmark 2001

edit:

I borrowed the CPU from my Tualatin Windows 98 system and gained a few MHz, this CPU is much better but there is a FSB hole when running the memory 1:1 between 160 and 166 MHz and the CPU wont do 10.5x 166 so its stuck at 10.5x 160MHz.

some stuff is faster on the p3 probably because of the windows version (7 vs XP)

SPBHM wrote:

some stuff is faster on the p3 probably because of the windows version (7 vs XP)

Yes, your system would probably get over 20K in XP. That Yorkfield/Harpertown CPU really needs a better video card though.

Skyscraper wrote:

SPBHM wrote:

some stuff is faster on the p3 probably because of the windows version (7 vs XP)

Yes, your system would probably get over 20K in XP. That Yorkfield/Harpertown CPU really needs a better video card though.

Speaking of. Here's what a slightly faster 771 12MB harpertown cpu can do with some faster GPU than what SPBHM posted. A pair of GTX 470 EVGA Hydro Copper FTW cards that run +40% overclocked (and water cooled). Finally upgraded my 775 tower to decent GPU for the first time in it's life.

Larger: www.outfoxed.net/775-water/3D_Mark_2001 ... -470's.png

This is run in Windows 7 x64 though, I'm too lazy right now to put XP on here. Maybe some day if I ever get around to it.

EDIT: And yes, this is running nvidia SLI on an AMD CrossFireX P45 chipset 775 motherboard. See the nvidia inspector graphs for utilization during the benchmark, as well as gpu-z to show SLI Enabled. 😎

Here is a Willamette P4 @2375 MHz with PC133 SDRAM @166 MHZ, its not as fast as the Tualatin system some posts above, not even close.

3dmark 2001. Slow but at least not a total failure. (The scaling is good, the system gets 6600 Points with a P4 1.7 and 133MHz CL2226 memory.)

3dmark 2000. A total failure. 3dmark 2000 is really bottlenecked by the slow SDR memory. (5400 Points with a P4 1.7 and 133MHz CL2226 memory.)

3dmark 99. Slow but not as bad as the 3dmark 2000 result. (The scaling is OK, the system got 7500 Points with a P4 1.7 and 133MHz CL2226 memory.)

Willamette 2.37GHz now that's quite good (well the clock I mean, I'm used to seeing those things at 1.7 or lower and that's it), it even deserves some RDRAM.

Skyscraper wrote:

Here is a Willamette P4 @2375 MHz with PC133 SDRAM @166 MHZ, its not as fast as the Tualatin system some posts above, not even c […]
Show full quote

Here is a Willamette P4 @2375 MHz with PC133 SDRAM @166 MHZ, its not as fast as the Tualatin system some posts above, not even close.

3dmark 2001. Slow but at least not a total failure. (The scaling is good, the system gets 6600 Points with a P4 1.7 and 133MHz CL2226 memory.)

3dmark 2000. A total failure. 3dmark 2000 is really bottlenecked by the slow SDR memory. (5400 Points with a P4 1.7 and 133MHz CL2226 memory.)

3dmark 99. Slow but not as bad as the 3dmark 2000 result. (The scaling is OK, the system got 7500 Points with a P4 1.7 and 133MHz CL2226 memory.)

That's astonishingly bad, especially the 3DMark 2000 CPU score. Tualatin at 1575 is almost twice as fast, scoring 748. 😲

I almost want to pull out my Northwood Celeron 2.6 and see how it does with the different versions of 3DMark.

Standard Def Steve wrote:

Skyscraper wrote:

Here is a Willamette P4 @2375 MHz with PC133 SDRAM @166 MHZ, its not as fast as the Tualatin system some posts above, not even c […]
Show full quote

Here is a Willamette P4 @2375 MHz with PC133 SDRAM @166 MHZ, its not as fast as the Tualatin system some posts above, not even close.

3dmark 2001. Slow but at least not a total failure. (The scaling is good, the system gets 6600 Points with a P4 1.7 and 133MHz CL2226 memory.)

3dmark 2000. A total failure. 3dmark 2000 is really bottlenecked by the slow SDR memory. (5400 Points with a P4 1.7 and 133MHz CL2226 memory.)

3dmark 99. Slow but not as bad as the 3dmark 2000 result. (The scaling is OK, the system got 7500 Points with a P4 1.7 and 133MHz CL2226 memory.)

That's astonishingly bad, especially the 3DMark 2000 CPU score. Tualatin at 1575 is almost twice as fast, scoring 748. 😲

I almost want to pull out my Northwood Celeron 2.6 and see how it does with the different versions of 3DMark.

The combination of the somewhat "new" driver 92.91, the Geforce 6800GT and the lack of memory bandwidth seem to make a huge bottleneck even worse. I tested a Northwood Celeron aswell and its even slower.

In fact the performance is so bad that I almost thought something was wrong so I installed a Northwood P4 2.26 and clocked it to 3 Ghz just to see if it would perform OK with its larger cache or if this board performs horrible with all CPUs. The Northwood P4 performs as it should so there is nothing wrong with the board its just the combination of small cache and lack of memory bandwidth that kills the performance with the Willamette and the Celeron.

3dmark 99 Northwood Celeron 2600, Asus P4B i845, 512MB PC133 Geforce 6800GT.

3dmark 99 Northwood P4 2.26@3GHz, Asus P4B i845, 512MB PC133 Geforce 6800GT.

3dmark 2000 Northwood Celeron 2600, Asus P4B i845, 512MB PC133 Geforce 6800GT.

3dmark 2000 Northwood P4 2.26@3GHz, Asus P4B i845, 512MB PC133 Geforce 6800GT.

3dmark 2001 Northwood Celeron 2600, Asus P4B i845, 512MB PC133 Geforce 6800GT.

3dmark 2000 Northwood P4 2.26@3GHz, Asus P4B i845, 512MB PC133 Geforce 6800GT.

177MHz SDRAM that's pretty good

as for Northwood Celeron... the only good memories I have was overclocking a 2.1GHz one, ti was pretty easy for that... but the performance...

Celeron prescott was a lot better.

SPBHM wrote:

177MHz SDRAM that's pretty good

as for Northwood Celeron... the only good memories I have was overclocking a 2.1GHz one, ti was pretty easy for that... but the performance...

Celeron prescott was a lot better.

I got the Northwood P4 2.26 up to 3.2 GHz with the memory running at 189 Mhz seemingly stable but that was with the IO voltage raised to 3.6V. The performance was still scaling fine but I got some strange stutters in the "Game 4 Nature" test in 3dmark 2001 so I backed down to 3.0 with the IO voltage @ default 3.4V. Perhaps the AGP frequency isnt locked and was running too much out of spec.

The memory module is a dual sided 512 MB PC133 CL2 module with Infineon chips

Overclocking the Celeron 2600 did not improve the performance much as the board drops the memory timings as soon as you go over 140 MHz memory speed regardless of what you set in the BIOS setup.

I have my athlonXP 3200+ (400 mhz FSB barton core) chip that runs stable @ 2500 something mhz with a 6800 ultra in it. Would you like some results from that as a comparison from "the other side of the fence" to intel about that time? I think the A-XP chips were around northwood chips. I'd have to check the dates though. It runs dual-channel ddr-400 though so I don't know if that would be a good comparison vs your SDR intel systems.

kithylin wrote:

I have my athlonXP 3200+ (400 mhz FSB barton core) chip that runs stable @ 2500 something mhz with a 6800 ultra in it. Would you like some results from that as a comparison from "the other side of the fence" to intel about that time? I think the A-XP chips were around northwood chips. I'd have to check the dates though.

The Athlon XP 3200+ will perform much much better than a P4 Northwoood with PC133 memory. It gave the later Intel dual DDR chipsets for Northwoods with 800 Mhz FSB a run for their money, at 2500MHz I expect the Barton to be competetive with all single core Netbust CPUs.

More benchmark results are always nice though 😀