Intel VIIV vs. AMD LIVE!

Article Index

Gaming Benchmarks 1

Performance Comparisons with Unreal Tournament 2004
Details: www.unrealtournament.com/ut2004/

UT2004
Although the gaming community is eagerly awaiting the arrival of the latest iteration of Unreal Tournament based upon the new Unreal Engine 3, nearly every gamer can recall wasting hours of their life playing Unreal Tournament 2004. A wildly popular online game and staple of LAN parties worldwide, many will still find this game in their collection and some still find time to squeeze in a few Deathmatch games. For our testing purposes, we ran at a resolution of 1024x768 @ 60Hz with no FSAA or AF.

 

Despite being two dramatically different platforms, the two HP systems offer nearly identical performance in this benchmark. Thankfully, each system is able to run the game at respectable settings while still providing more than 40fps. As a result, gameplay is extremely fluid and each platform could be a viable candidate for an inexpensive LAN box so long as the chosen titles aren't well beyond the capabilities of this title. 

Performance Comparisons with Command & Conquer Generals: Zero Hour
Details: www.ea.com/official/cc/generals/us/

C&C Generals: Zero Hour
One of the most highly anticipated titles of this genre, Command and Conquer Generals was one of the first of its kind to introduce high-quality graphics and effects. Nearly a year after its initial introduction, the Zero Hour expansion was introduced and packed with even more impressive visuals. For our testing purposes, we chose a skirmish on the Final Crusade map with both the China Nuke General and China Infantry General selected. The resolution was set to 1024x768 and details were set to "high".

As you can see, the Intel IGP offered better performance than the NVIDIA IGP in this title, despite the fact that this game is a part of NVIDIA's TWIMTBP program. In all fairness, the AMD platform is using an IGP which was released nearly two years ago. Regardless, the Intel GMA 3000 has a 7 fps advantage and is the only one of the two to break the 30fps barrier. During gameplay, the Intel solution was noticeably more fluid with no slowdowns in areas where there was a high concentration of units. 

Performance Comparisons with Battlefield 2
Details: www.ea.com/official/battlefield/battlefield2/

Battlefield 2
Although lacking the wild popularity of the original Battlefield: 1942, Battlefield 2 proved to be a unique title as it ties in the same gameplay which made the original a legend with the technology and weaponry of modern warfare. For our testing purposes, we chose a skirmish on the Strike * Kirkland map with the view distance set to 75%. Here, the resolution was set to 1024x768 with "low" detail settings. Hardware sound was enabled with sound quality set to "medium".

Battlefield 2 represents one of the more recent and more graphically challenging titles we chose for this review. Unfortunately, we were not even able to take a single performance measurement on the Intel platform as the game refused to run on that system despite using the latest drivers and game patches. Fortunately, the AMD system played the game without issue though performance was somewhat low at the settings we chose. Lowering detail levels or dropping the resolution to 800x600 would likely be a wise choice for those looking for more fluid gameplay.

Tags:  AMD, Intel, live, Ive, AM

Image gallery

Related content

Comments

Show comments blog comments powered by Disqus