Synthetic Graphics Performance

The 3DMark series of benchmarks developed and provided by Futuremark are among the most widely used tools for benchmark reporting and comparisons. Although the benchmarks are very useful for providing apple to apple comparisons across a broad array of GPU and CPU configurations, they are not a substitute for actual application and gaming benchmarks. In this sense we consider the 3DMark benchmarks to be purely synthetic in nature but still valuable for providing consistent measurements of performance.

Graphics Performance - 3DMark06

Graphics Performance - 3DMark01

In our first tests, each platform score is so close that there is no winner here. In the memory and CPU sensitive 3DMark01 benchmark we see the Asus and Abit boards scoring extremely close at the same memory timings. Although we have not reported memory benchmarks scores in this article, the Abit and Asus boards performed almost identically at the same settings indicating the P965 Express chipset will have excellent memory performance.

General System Performance

The PCMark05 benchmark developed and provided by Futuremark was designed for determining overall system performance for the typical home computing user. This tool provides both system and component level benchmarking results utilizing subsets of real world applications or programs. This benchmark is useful for providing comparative results across a broad array of graphics cards, CPUs, hard disks, and memory configurations and it also includes some multithreading results. In this sense we consider the PCMark benchmark to be both synthetic and real world in nature while providing consistency in our benchmark results.

General Performance - PCMark 2005

The margins are extremely close in the PCMark05 results but the NVIDIA platform continues to show a very slight advantage over the Intel platform. While looking at the individual test results, we noticed the Abit board matched the other boards in the graphics tests and finished slightly behind in the multitasking tests due to the memory settings. We also noticed the NVIDIA nForce 500 Intel Edition board had 19% better performance than either Intel board in the XP Hard Disk Drive Startup test, with the ICH8R Abit performing 4% better than the ICH7R on the Asus.

Benchmark Setup Multimedia Performance
Comments Locked

33 Comments

View All Comments

  • Anemone - Monday, July 3, 2006 - link

    Yes this is quite interesting, thank you very much Anand and Gary!

    Things are heating up and getting very interesting. As the windup to Conroe gets underway a lot of folks are out buying mobo's now. I want to see more testing first, not really being yet committed more to the 975 or the 590. Have to be honest and say the 590 is proving to be more than I thought it was, but that's a good thing.

    Thus I'm taking all this information in, and am grateful for your previews!
  • Calin - Monday, July 3, 2006 - link

    If the supply of Conroe processors will be much lower than the demand, one can expect the mainboard prices to decrease - if the supply of mainboards will be much higher than the supply of retail Conroe processors. So, buying mainboards in advance might prove a not so good idea.
  • mine - Monday, July 3, 2006 - link

    most interesting reading of the last 4 weeks

    this 965 vs. 975

    thanks anand

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now