Abit AN7

The AM3 score looks weak on VIA KT133A already, while KT266A and nforce2 are within spitting distance of each other.
10. We stay at 1024*768 resolution but we increase details to maximum and add sound:
ABIT KT7A-RAID

ABIT KR7A-RAID

ABIT AN7

11. We increase the resolution to 1280*1024 - max details and see the average framerate - this is what I have taken into account and not the AM3 score:
ABIT KT7A-RAID

ABIT KR7A-RAID

ABIT AN7

12. We stay at 1280*1024 and make the same tests with sound this time:
ABIT KT7A-RAID

ABIT KR7A-RAID

ABIT AN7

The situation does not bode well for KT133A; it is lagging behind quite a bit!
13. The final resolution is 1600*1200, max details, no sound first
ABIT KT7A-RAID

ABIT KR7A-RAID

ABIT AN7

14. And the final and most demanding setting: 1600*1200, max details, sound on:
ABIT KT7A-RAID

ABIT KR7A-RAID

ABIT AN7

Aquamark3 conclusions: unlike period correct tests that showed the SDRAM - ONLY KT133A chipset to perform very close to DDR ones such as AMD760 andKT266A, today under more strenuous conditions, using far more powerful AGP cards that were available at the time and switching resolutions and level of details to reflect more possibilities - many of us will play at increased resolutions and level of detail and not at 1024*768 only - show that using a Thunderbird with SDRAM is a sure way to lose a lot or performance.
Particularly noteworthy are the tests done with sound: there is a colossal gap between KT133A and KT266A/nforce2 in AM3 when using Creative live 0100: 25% better average framerate on KR7A and 35% (!!) better on nforce2.

15. We switch to 3dmark tests and the first is the 2000 version; we start at default resolution and settings: 1024*768 16 bit color depth:
ABIT KT7A-RAID
ABIT KR7A-RAID
ABIT AN7

16. We increase the resolution to 1280*1024, max details - that means 32 bit color depth:
ABIT KT7A-RAID
ABIT KR7A-RAID
ABIT AN7

17. One more time we increase the resolution: 1600*1200!
ABIT KT7A-RAID
ABIT KR7A-RAID
ABIT AN7