HOW
WE CONFIGURED THE TEST SYSTEM:
We
configured the Biostar and AOpen SFF PCs as similarly as
possible. The video cards, memory, hard drives,
driver versions (where applicable) and OS
configurations were identical. Before we started
benchmarking these machines, we entered their system BIOSes and set each board to their "Optimized
Defaults". We then configured the RAM to run
at 200MHz (DDR400), with the timings set by the SPD.
The hard drives were then formatted, and Windows XP
Professional (SP1) was installed. When the
installation was complete, we hit the Windows Update
site and downloaded all of the available updates, with
the exceptions of the ones related to Windows Messenger
and Media Player 9. Then we installed all of the
necessary drivers, and removed Windows Messenger from
the system altogether. Auto-Updating and System
Restore were disabled as well, and we set up a 768MB
permanent page file on the same partition as the
Windows installation. Lastly, we set Windows XP's
Visual Effects to "best performance", installed all of
our benchmarking software, defragged the hard drives
and ran all of the tests.
|
The HotHardware Test Systems |
It's Not The Size Of The Enclosure... |
|
System 1:
Intel Pentium 4
3.2GHz Processor
AOpen EZ65 SFF PC
Intel 865G Chipset
2x256MB Kingston PC3200
CL2 - HyperX DIMMS
Radeon 9800 Pro
On-Board 10/100 Ethernet
On-Board Audio
WD "Raptor" 36GB Hard Drive
10,000 RPM SATA
Windows XP Pro SP1
ATi catalyst v3.9 Drivers
Intel Drivers v5.0.2.1003
DirectX 9.0b |
SYSTEM 2:
Intel Pentium 4
3.2GHz Processor
Biostar iDEQ 200T SFF PC
Intel 865G Chipset
2x256MB Kingston PC3200
CL2 - HyperX DIMMS
Radeon 9800 Pro
On-Board 10/100 Ethernet
On-Board Audio
WD "Raptor" 36GB Hard Drive
10,000 RPM SATA
Windows XP Pro SP1
ATi catalyst v3.9 Drivers
Intel Drivers v5.0.2.1003
DirectX 9.0b |
|
PCMark2002 Benchmarks |
Some Synthetic
Scores |
|
In our
first batch of tests, we used Futuremark's
PCMark2002 benchmarking suite. Like other synthetic
benchmarks, it's difficult to translate PCMark2002
scores into "real world" performance. However,
because it is very easy to run, and produces
repeatable, comparable results, PCMark2002 has become
a staple here in the lab. We ran PCMark2002's
"CPU" and "Memory" performance modules on
both of these systems. We'll also be comparing
these machines to two Shuttle XPCs we've recently
reviewed, the P4 powered SB65G2 and the Athlon 64
powered SN85G4. For your reference, the CPU module incorporates the
following tests:
CPU
Test:
The Shuttle SB65G2,
AOpen EZ65 and Biostar iDEQ 200T are all based on
the same chipset, and were tested using the same CPU
and RAM, which is why the above results are so
similar. It's also evident that PCMark2002's
CPU benchmark obviously favors the high clock speed
of the Pentium 4, which is why the SN85G4 with it's
Athlon 64 3200+ (2GHz Clock Speed) falls short of
the other machines tested.
Memory Test Technical
details: (Quoted From Futuremark)
Raw
read, write, and read-modify-write operations are
performed starting from a 3072 kilobytes array
decreasing in size to 1536 KB, 384 KB, 48 KB and
finally 6 KB. Each size of block is tested two second
and the amount of accessed data is given as result. In
the STL container test a list of 116 byte elements is
constructed and sorted by an integer pseudo-random
key. The list is then iterated through as many times
as possible for 2 seconds and the total size of the
accessed elements is given as result. There are 6 runs
of this test, with 24576 items in the largest run
corresponding to a total data amount of 1536 KB,
decreasing in size to 12288 items (768 KB), 6144 items
(384 KB), 1536 items (96 KB), 768 items (48 KB) and 96
items in the smallest run corresponding to 6 KB of
total data.
The performance deltas
between the i865 based machines were a bit more
pronounced with PCMark2002's memory performance
module, but the differences were not drastic.
The Biostar iDEQ 200T pulled off a narrow victory in
this test, followed by Shuttle's SB65G2 and then the
AOpen EZ65. The nForce 3 powered SN85G4 brought
up the rear.
|
Video Encoding Benchmarks With The
AOpen & Biostar's SFF Systems |
Hollywood, Here We Come! |
|
We also
did some video encoding with the AOpen EZ65 and
Biostar iDEQ 200T. To get the scores listed below,
we took a 24MB, standard MPEG 2 format video clip and
converted it to the DivX format, using v5.1 of the CODEC,
with XMPEG v5.02. The results reported below
are in Minutes:Seconds, lower numbers equal better
performance.
The iDEQ 200T slightly
outpaced the competition in this test as well. 2
seconds separated the iDEQ 200T from the SB65G2, which
led the AOpen EZ65 by 5 seconds. This is another
test that favors the Pentium 4's architecture, which
is evident by the 21 second spread between the first
place finisher, the Biostar iDEQ 200T, and the last
place finisher, the SN85G4.
A Few More Tests & The
Ratings
|