Foxconn 925A01-8EKRS2
We continued our testing with another application from Futuremark, 3DMark03, and with a video encoding benchmark, Windows Media Encoder 9. In the WME9 test, we took a 416MB Digital Video file and encoded to WMV9 format. Times were recorded in Minutes : Seconds, with lower times indicating better performance.
 |
|
The previous trend continued with the Windows Media Encoder 9 benchmark. Here, the Abit AA8 DuraMAX was again the fastest of the bunch, completing the test 5 seconds faster than the Foxconn 925A01-8EKRS2. A 5 second difference equates to about a 3.3% advantage for the Abit board here, which was one of the larger deltas we saw in all of our testing for this article.
 |
|
It's not an actual game, but 3DMark03's built-in CPU test is a "gaming related" DirectX metric that's useful for comparing relative performance among similarly equipped systems. This test consists of two different 3D scenes that are generated with a software renderer, which is dependant on the host CPU's performance. This means that the calculations normally reserved for your 3D accelerator, are instead sent to the central processor. The number of frames generated per second in each test are used to determine the final score.
3DMark03's CPU performance test didn't show much of a variation between the three systems we tested. The Abit AA8 did post the highest score, but again the performance delta between the Abit and Foxconn boards was so small (13 points) it falls well within the margin of error in this test.
