Abit IC7G and Asus P4C800 Canterwood Mobotherboards

Article Index

Abit IC7G and Asus P4C800 Canterwood Mobotherboards - Page 5

Abit IC7-G vs. Asus P4C800
A tale of two Canterwoods

By, Dave Altavilla
April 29, 2003

 

FutureMark's 3DMark 2003 is a for all intents and purposes, a Graphics Card benchmark.  However, since many enthusiasts and end users, that would take an interest in the latest and greatest motherboard technology, are also more than just casual Gamers, we feel it is another good data-point, as a component in the complete picture of performance analysis.   

3DMark 2003
DX8 and DX9 Gaming Synthetic Benchmarks

The first test we ran, was the default setting for this benchmark, which sets the Graphics Card (in this case our Radeon 9700Pro) to 1024X768 resolution at 32 bit color levels.  At this setting the test is very Graphics Subsystem limited and the CPU and Motherboard are only weighting the scores to a certain extent.  However, this test does illustrate a good point of reference.

 

The point here is that, unless the game you are playing is also heavily burdened with things like positional and terrain calculations, as with Flight Sims or AI (artificial intelligence) calculations, as with some FPS games for example, then most likely the Graphics Card in your system is going to be the bottleneck, especially at high resolutions.  As such, a few percentage points here and there for CPU/Motherboard performance, won't drive frame rates much higher.  We'll cover some scenarios where the testing is CPU limited, in future benchmarks here.  However, in this test as you can see, even a 380 - 450MHz overclock doesn't buy you all that much, versus the lowest score put forth by the Intel board.

 

The CPU Performance module of 3DMark 03 tells a bit of a different story though and Asus takes the lead again, by a small margin, with the P4C800.  There is roughly a 2% edge for the P4C800 versus the IC7-G, when at stock 3GHz speeds.  Again, Asus' aggressive PLL timings give it this slight lead.  However, the lead over the Intel board is as much as 5%, which is a little more noticeable.  At overclocked speeds, the P4C800 really begins to break out, again stable at 3.45GHz, with a 1.6V core voltage.

 

PCMark 2002
Synthetic CPU and Memory Bandwidth Testing

PCMark 2002 is a synthetic benchmark that utilizes standard desktop functions like JPEG Decoding, Audio Compression and Text Search. 

 

 

PCMark 2002 shows us that Asus is also optimizing performance with the memory subsystem, slightly better than the Abit board.  Surprisingly there is over a 1000 point lead in the memory test, for the P4C800, although the processor test above shows another three way tie, for the most part.  Could it be that Asus is taking better advantage of Intel's new "PAT" technology (bottom of the page), with chipset memory timings?  Or is this some sort of testing fluke?  We ran this test several times, checking BIOS settings to make sure they were apple to apples.  Each time we came up with the same results.  Asus wins this race hands down.  You should only place so much stock in this synthetic benchmark though.  Let's look at more real-life gaming situations, which should exploit the performance of all the candidates here.

 

Comanche 4, Quake 3 and The Ratings

Tags:  Asus, C7, DS, Mobo, can, P4, Abit, board, bot, AR, and

Related content

Comments

Show comments blog comments powered by Disqus