|
"Real World" Performance with
the Stones |
Simulated
Application Performance |
|
In our
next test, we ran ZD Labs' Business Winstone 2001
benchmark to
simulate "real world" application performance.
We'll directly quote ZD's eTestingLabs website to explain
exactly what this test does, and how the score is
tabulated:
"Business Winstone is a system-level,
application-based benchmark that measures a PC's
overall performance when running today's top-selling
Windows-based 32-bit applications on Windows 98 SE,
Windows NT 4.0 (SP6 or later), Windows 2000, Windows
Me, or Windows XP. Business Winstone doesn't mimic
what these packages do; it runs real applications
through a series of scripted activities and uses the
time a PC takes to complete those activities to
produce its performance scores."
The Business Winstone tests include:
-
Five
Microsoft Office 2000 applications (Access, Excel,
FrontPage, PowerPoint, and Word)
-
Microsoft Project 98
-
Lotus
Notes R5
-
NicoMak
WinZip
-
Norton
Antivirus
-
Netscape
Communicator
The DRAGON didn't fare
to well in the Business Winstone tests. The
RDRAM powered TH7II surged ahead of the DRAGON by
about 7.1%. Unlike their Athlon chipsets,
VIA's P4X series doesn't seem to do to well in this
benchmark.
Next we ran ZD's Content
Creation Winstone 2002. This benchmark runs a similar
series of scripted activities, but the tests are
comprised of more "bandwidth hungry" applications.
The applications used in the Content Creation Winstone
2002 tests include:
-
Adobe
Photoshop 6.0.1
-
Adobe
Premiere 6.0
-
Macromedia Director 8.5
-
Macromedia Dreamweaver UltraDev 4
-
Microsoft Windows Media Encoder 7.01.00.3055
-
Netscape
Navigator 6/6.01
-
Sonic
Foundry Sound Forge 5.0c (build 184)
We saw a slightly larger
performance delta in the Content Creation 2002
tests, where the RDRAM based system outperformed the
Soyo P4X400 DRAGON by about 7.5%. We were
surprised to see the P4X400 DRAGON faltering a bit
here, but it seems we're not the only ones to have
witnessed sub par performance in the Winstone tests
with VIA's DDR chipsets for the Pentium 4.
Other publications have reported similar findings.
CONCLUSION:
From the moment we opened the
box, the Soyo P4X400 DRAGON Ultra Platinum edition had
us excited. VIA's KT series of chipsets for the
Athlon has been dominating the competition for years,
so we had high hopes for the P4X400. The
"discussions" over the P4X's legality may
have caused many
manufacturers to shy away from VIA's DDR P4 chipsets,
but Soyo stepped up and decided to release a
eye-catching board, promising top notch performance
and a slew of cutting edge features. When
setting up the board, and during some preliminary
tests, our initial feelings were that Soyo had hit a home
run with the P4X400 DRAGON Ultra. Once we
started tinkering, and tried to squeeze more
performance from the DRAGON though, things got a
little ugly. If you're in the market for a
full-featured board, sporting AGP8X and DDR333
support, and don't plan on aggressively overclocking
your system, the P4X400 DRAGON Ultra is an awesome
product. The performance of the board was good,
it was very stable at default settings and we didn't see any
incompatibility with three different brands of RAM
(GEiL, Corsair and Kingston),
two different video cards (GF4 and 9700Pro) and two different sound
cards (Audigy2 and Santa Cruz). However, hardcore enthusiasts may want to stand
back and see if future BIOS or board revisions clear up
some of the issues we found. The only major flaw
with our P4X400 DRAGON Ultra was its inability to run
the memory at DDR400 speeds, even though the Soyo is
advertising this board as having DDR400 support.
Overall though, Soyo has put together an impressive
motherboard that, with a little maturity, may turn out
to be a killer piece of hardware. Based on its
extensive feature set, good performance and solid
bundle we give the Soyo P4X400 DRAGON Ultra Platinum a
HotHardware Heat Meter rating of 8...
- Decent Layout
- Good
Performance
- AGP 8X
- Loaded with
Extras
- Cool to look
at!
|
- Price
- Flakey DDR400
support
- Mildly
disappointing overclocking performance
|
Discuss This, Or
Any Other Review in the PC Hardware Forum!
|