Single Threaded Results (*Bold indicates best
score)
|
840
EE
|
3.73
XE
|
| Sisoft
CPU Dhrystone ALU |
19071
|
11072
|
| Sisoft
CPU Whetstone FPU/iSSE2 |
7944/13280
|
4597/7765
|
| SiSoft
MMX Integer iSSE2 |
46223
|
26749
|
| SiSoft
MMX Float-Point iSSE2 |
61593
|
35835
|
| SiSoft
Mem Int Buff'd |
4951
|
6645
|
| SiSoft
Mem Float Buff'd |
4946
|
6671
|
| SYSmark
2004 ICC |
285
|
259
|
| SYSmark
2004 Office Productivity |
161
|
206
|
| PiFast |
48.89
|
42.13
|
| TMPGEnc |
1:38
|
2:04
|
| CDeX |
1:38
|
1:25
|
| Doom
3 |
90.8
|
110.8
|
| FarCry |
113.8
|
135.42
|
| UT2004:
as-convoy |
79.69
|
95.75
|
Rather than commenting on each of our usual suite of benchmarks,
we decided to put them all together and provide some observations.
In Sisoft, with the exception of the memory tests, the Extreme
Edition 840 gives the 3.73GHz Extreme Edition a severe beating.
Given it's a synthetic benchmark, we aren't getting too excited
about this, but it does demonstrate the fact that the dual core
does pump a lot of floating point muscle. The memory set sharing
does impact the ram's performance significantly, which is to be
expected as the 840 does not have a dedicated bus to the memory
for each core.
Things were a toss up in our application tests, as the Extreme
Edition 840 proved to be very strong in multimedia applications,
but less so in "office" type apps. In the gaming tests
the 3.73GHz Extreme Edition easily surpassed the 840 in all the
benchmarks. The differences here is not due to the architecture
as much as it is in the clock speeds between the two that was
the determining factor.
Multitasking Tests
Multitasking is something everyone of us does everyday. Be it
downloading files while surfing the net, or encoding a DivX file
while checking email. In these scenarios, most likely, the applications
are single threaded but using multiple threads from the CPU. We'll
get into the multithreaded aspects of applications soon enough,
but we ran a number of tests in a somewhat unrealistic scenario
of shrinking a DVD as explained earlier and running some benchmarks.
Please refer to the previous page for the full details of our
setup.
PiFast
Despite the heavy loads, we can see that the faster
clocked 3.73GHz Extreme Edition is still the fastest of the bunch.
We threw in a Pentium 4 540 into the mix (running on an Intel
925X) just to see how it stacks up against the Extreme Edition
840, and despite the matching clock speeds, the additional cache
on the 840 helps it hold the 2nd place position.
TMPGEnc
In a single threaded enviornment, the 840 stomped
on the 3.73, but loading up the CPU didn't seem to hurt the 3.73
all that much. The 840 on the otherhand took a big hit, but still
held on to the lead.
CDeX
Again, clock speeds seem to matter more with current
applications and multitasking.
Doom 3
FarCry
UT2004
As we can see in the gaming tests, clock speeds rule the roost
as far as Intel CPUs are concerned. Both CPUs lose about the same
percentage of performance, but breaking it down, the Extreme Edition
840 takes a 33% hit in Doom 3, 35% in FarCry and 30% in UT2004.
The 3.73GHz XE is hit with a 28%, 29%, and 30% loss respectively.
NEXT
