
TESTING METHODOLOGY:
To
help fully explain the scores we listed in the
following benchmarks, we felt it was necessary to
explain how the systems were setup before running
the benchmarks. On all of the boards, we started off by
manually optimizing the
BIOS settings to the most aggressive RAM
settings and system options. The memory
frequency was manually set to DDR333 for the
first round of tests, and then to DDR400 on the
KT400 boards for another round. The hard drive was
formatted each time, and Windows XP Professional with
Service Pack 1 was installed. After the Windows
installation was complete, we installed the
VIA 4-in-1 chipset drivers, version 4.43, and installed the drivers for the rest of
the components, using the drivers supplied on
the CD, except for the GeForce Ti 4600.
For the GeForce, we downloaded and installed the
latest NVIDIA reference drivers, version
40.71.
Auto-Updating, Hibernation, and System Restore were disabled,
and then we set up a 512MB permanent page file.
On these test systems we set the visual quality
to "best performance" in system performance as
well as in the video driver settings. Lastly, we
installed all of the benchmarking software,
defragged the machine, and rebooted one last
time. We brought out the
Asus A7V333
board that we had reviewed back in August for a
reference point. If you remember, this
board fared very well, and we thought it would
be good to compare the difference between a
well-rounded KT333 and the newer KT400s.
 |
The Hot Hardware Test Systems |
Can the
KT400 replace the KT333? |
|
TEST BOARDS:
Soyo
SY-KT400 Dragon Ultra (KT400)
Shuttle AK37GTR
(KT400)
Asus A7V333
(KT333)
COMMON
HARDWARE:
AMD
Athlon XP 2200+
256MB Corsair PC3200 DDR
Chaintech GeForce 4 Ti 4600
On-board AC'97 audio
Western Digital WD200BB ATA100 7200rpm 20GB Hard
Drive
Creative Labs 52x CD-ROM
Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 1
VIA 4-in-1 Drivers, version 4.43
NVIDIA Detonator Drivers, version 40.71
|
 |
Performance Comparisons with SiSoft
SANDRA 2002 |
Sandra,
Sandra, Sandra! |
|
|
SANDRA (the System ANalyzer, Diagnostic
and Reporting Assistant) is an
information and diagnostic utility put out by the
folks at SiSoftware. It's a quick and
easy way to compare results
from any system against an internal database of similar systems
and drives. These benchmarks are theoretical
scores, and can't necessarily be measured in ?real-world?
terms, but provide a
good way to make comparisons amongst like
components. For each test that we ran, we chose
components from the database list that we thought
would be found in mainstream PCs. We ran a set of tests at both the default
speeds, and then again when overclocked.
The two columns on the left are from the Soyo
Dragon Ultra while the two on the right come from
the Shuttle AK37GTR.
Soyo
CPU Arithmetic
at 133MHz FSB
 |
Soyo
CPU Arithmetic
at 145MHz FSB
 |
Shuttle
CPU Arithmetic
at 133MHz FSB
 |
Shuttle
CPU Arithmetic
at 141MHz FSB
 |
In
both sets of charts we can see that the boards are
capable of putting up some high scores in the CPU
tests. It's hard to really call a winner as
the scores were very close to each other, but the Soyo did come closest to the Athlon XP 2200+ score
from Sandra's database, only missing by 5 points.
When overclocking the boards, we were able to get
the Soyo stable at 145MHz, while the Shuttle
topped out at 141MHz. In each case,
benchmarking when overclocked produced results
that were well above all of the database scores.
Soyo
CPU
Multimedia
at 133MHz FSB
 |
Soyo
CPU
Multimedia
at 145MHz FSB
 |
Shuttle
CPU
Multimedia
at 133MHz FSB
 |
Shuttle
CPU
Multimedia
at 141MHz FSB
 |
The
CPU Multimedia tests were pretty much in line with
what we saw with the CPU Arithmetic, although the
delta between the two boards was a little more
apparent. The Soyo board produced scores
that were close to, yet slightly behind, the
scores listed in Sandra for an Athlon XP 2200+
CPU. The Shuttle board was still up there,
but lagged behind the Soyo board by another 40
points or so. Overclocking the boards
produced some extra points, although obviously a
bit more for the Soyo, which was able to get an
extra 4MHz over the Shuttle when overclocked.
Soyo
Memory
Bandwidth
at 133MHz FSB
 |
Soyo
Memory
Bandwidth
at 145MHz FSB
 |
Shuttle
Memory
Bandwidth
at 133MHz FSB
 |
Shuttle
Memory
Bandwidth
at 141MHz FSB
 |
Once
more, we saw the Soyo board produce numbers that
were almost exact with Sandra's score for a KT333
using DDR333 memory, however the Shuttle board
could not keep pace. It was about 40 points
behind the Soyo board, and behind all of the other
database scores for the other chipsets.
Overclocking the Shuttle board allowed us more
bandwidth, eclipsing the KT333 scores by a bit.
The Soyo board, when overclocked, produced a 10%
difference between scores.
Soyo
File System
|
Shuttle
File System
| Both boards
produced scores well above the database score for
an ATA 100, 7200rpm hard drive using FAT32.
The Soyo board, again, held a slight lead over the
Shuttle, getting an extra 100 points in file
system performance.
 |
Performance Comparisons with PC Mark
2002 |
CPU,
Memory and Hard Drive Testing |
|
For
our next overall PC comparison, we chose
MadOnion?s PCMark 2002. PCMark 2002 performs a
series of CPU tasks such as image compression,
text searches, and audio conversion to give us
three scores: CPU, Memory, and Hard Disk Drive (HDD).
It is a relatively quick process for comparing the
performance of two or more systems. We ran
the benchmark for all three boards using DDR333
memory timings, optimized as best we could, and
then again after raising the memory speed to
DDR400. Finally, we ran another set after getting
a stable overclock, 141MHz for the Shuttle board
and 145MHz for the Soyo. On both boards,
however, we needed to lower the memory timings to
obtain a stable operating system.

We got
a bit of a shock when we saw these scores, as
neither of the KT400 boards outperformed the Asus
board, based on the KT333. In fact, you will
see this trend in most, if not all, of the
following graphs as well. Also notable was
the drop-off when switching between DDR333 timings
and DDR400. This could partially be
explained by the fact that the stick of RAM we
used was rated at CAS 2 at 166MHz, but only CAS
2.5 at 200MHz.

Here
the performance drop-off was even more evident when
switching to DDR400. It is quite apparent
why VIA backed off from DDR400 support, as the
performance gains are just not to be found.
Running the memory speeds that far off from the
FSB just do not provide good results. The
Asus A7V333 topped the charts again, beating out
the Soyo by 11 points, while the Shuttle board
pulled into a distant third. Overclocking
the Shuttle board, however, brought the greatest
gain. It raised the Shuttle score by 170
points, narrowing the gap. The Soyo board,
on the other hand, only managed to gain a mere 55
extra points, even though it was overclocked
higher.

All of the scores were
neck and neck, finishing within 40 points of each
other. Predictably, the file system
performance scores dipped slightly when
overclocked, as IDE devices don't really seem to
take well to running out of spec.
|
Gaming & The Winstones
|
|
|
|