Abit's BD7RAID and Asus' P4B266 Dueling i845 DDR Boards

Article Index

Abit's BD7RAID and Asus' P4B266 Dueling i845 DDR Boards - Page 3

 

Dueling i845 DDR Boards From Abit and Asus
Abit's BD7-RAID and Asus' P4B266 Take Flight

By, Dave Altavilla
January 23, 2002

 
Let's fire up our most favorite Direct 3D System Performance Benchmark, 3DMark 2001 from MadOnion.com.

 

Head-to-Head / Performance Progression BD7-RAID Vrs. P4B266 and The i850
The gloves are off for Abit and Asus

The i850 board we used for reference in this test was none other than the current HH Lab Editor's Choice, Abit TH7II-RAID.  All boards were tested on a level playing field with the on board Intel EIDE controllers driving the ATA100 interface to our IBM hard drives.  No RAID setups were used in any of these tests.  Clearly, we see that Intel's i845 DDR solution is within a 2 - 3% striking distance from the i850/RAMBUS platform.  However, as we all know, the i845D comes at a much better price point.  The BD7-RAID and  P4B266, also in this test, are again within the standard variance of each other that this benchmark can produce between different runs.  Also, don't forget about the slightly goosed Asus PLL Clock, that we mentioned in page 3,  that could be giving the P4B266 a few extra points here.
 

 

 

Winstone Benchmarks
Tools of the trade benchmarking:  Adobe Photoshop 6.0.1 , Adobe Premiere 6.0 , Macromedia Director 8.5 , Macromedia Dreamweaver UltraDev 4 etc...

 

 

In the Business and Content Creation Winstone Tests, you'll notice a few interesting points of reference.  Both i845D boards actually performed on par or better than the i850/RAMBUS combination on the Business side of things.  Also, Abit's RAID setup on the BD7-RAID drove it into the lead with better I/O performance in its hard disk subsystem.  In the Content Creation Winstone however, bandwidth is king and so is the i850 with RDRAM.  Once again, the margin of lead is slim and all products fell within 4% of each other.  And again, Asus' slightly over-clocked stock CPU setting puts it ever so slightly in the lead, when compared to the BD7-RAID with a standard ATA100 drive and even with a RAID setup.   Is it time for Asus to come clean here and tell the community why they clock their boards slightly higher than the stock clock speed setting is reporting?  We'll leave that question for the more "controversial" sites to tackle.

 

 

Quake 3 and The Ratings

Tags:  Asus, DDR, RAID, DS, BD, P4, Abit, board, B2, AI, id, AR, and

Related content

Comments

Show comments blog comments powered by Disqus