Previous
Athlon XP/2200+: rendering performance review
Reviews Despite a new version 2.46 of 3D Studio Max that contains optimisations for the Pentium 4, the 2.53GHz Pentium 4 does not render simple 3D objects (Kinetix-logo) faster than an Athlon XP/2200+. However, the Pentium 4/2200 with DDR memory is 15...
[June 18, 2002, 16:19]
Athlon XP/2200+: Internet performance review
Reviews AMD’s Athlon XP has its nose in front when rendering HTML pages. The Athlon XP/2100+ is already slightly faster than the 2.53GHz Pentium 4, and the 2200+ extends that lead. The fastest AMD processor (Athlon XP/2200+) lags behind a Pentium 4 with...
[June 18, 2002, 16:21]
Athlon XP/2200+: gaming performance review
Reviews The fastest Athlon processor (Athlon XP/2200+) is beaten by the 2.53GHz Pentium 4 with PC1066 Rambus memory in MadOnion's 3DMark 2001 test. If PC800 Rambus or DDR266 memory is used, the Athlon XP/2200+ is faster.
[June 18, 2002, 16:25]
Athlon XP/2200+: conclusion review
Reviews AMD’s new 0.13-micron Athlon XP/2200+ delivers very good performance results. Only when faced with SSE2-optimised software and multimedia applications such as video and audio encoding programs does the Athlon XP give way to Intel’s Pentium 4.
[June 18, 2002, 16:31]
Athlon XP/2600+: gaming performance review
Reviews In tests with MadOnion’s 3DMark 2001 SE, the new Athlon XP/2600+ just about matches the 2.53GHz Pentium 4. The Vulpine test also reveals no significant differences in performance between the Athlon XP and Pentium 4 processors.
[September 3, 2002, 15:33]
Athlon XP/2600+: workstation performance review
Reviews The Data Explorer test in the brand-new Viewperf 7 Open GL benchmark places both Athlon XP processors well ahead of the 2.53GHz Pentium 4. In the Design Review (DRV) test, the Pentium 4 with PC1066 memory just holds its ground ahead of the Athlon XP.
[September 3, 2002, 15:30]
Athlon XP/2600+: rendering and decoding performance review
Reviews Despite the fact that 3D Studio Max 4.26 includes Pentium 4 optimisation, rendering of simple 3D objects (Kinetix Logo) with the 2.53GHz Pentium is no faster than it is with an Athlon XP/2200+. Rendering the architecture scene, which is recommended...
[September 3, 2002, 15:23]
Athlon XP/2600+: conclusion review
Reviews AMD released the Athlon XP/2600+ to market earlier than expected. The Athlon design is already seen as cost-driven by critics: AMD continued to manufacture the CPU on a 0.18-micron process for a long time, only introducing the 0.13-micron Athlon XP...
[September 3, 2002, 15:21]
Athlon XP/2600+: Internet performance review
Reviews Thanks to new chipset updates and BIOS optimisations, the Pentium 4 is now faster at rendering HTML pages than the Athlon XP processors. The 2.53GHz Pentium 4 and 2.13GHz Athlon XP/2600+ are almost equally fast when rendering PDF documents.
[September 3, 2002, 15:28]
Athlon XP/2600+: application performance review
Reviews With business applications such as Word, Excel, Notes and WinZip, which are all components of Business Winstone 2001, AMD’s Athlon XP processors are faster than Intel’s Pentium 4 chips. Even an Athlon XP/2200+ with a clock speed of 1.8GHz is ahead...
[September 3, 2002, 15:34]
Athlon XP/2600+: encoding performance review
Reviews Even so, the 2.53GHz Pentium 4 only just beats the 1.8GHz Athlon XP/2200+, and comes second to the new 2.13GHz Athlon XP/2600+ in this test. Intel’s 2.53GHz Pentium 4 is faster than the Athlon XP/2200+ at video encoding with LSX’s popular MPEG...
[September 3, 2002, 15:35]
Athlon XP/2200+: application performance review
Reviews With business applications such as Word, Excel, Notes and WinZip, which are all components of Business Winstone 2001, the new Athlon XP/2200+ further extends its lead over the Intel competition. AMD’s new Athlon XP/2200+ narrows the gap between it...
[June 18, 2002, 16:09]
Athlon XP/2200+: encoding performance review
Reviews The MP3 encoder MusicMatch Jukebox has been optimised in version 7.0 for Intel’s Pentium 4, allowing the 2.53GHz Pentium 4 with Rambus to keep its nose in front of the new Athlon XP/2200+. The Pentium 4/2200 with DDR memory is slower than the...
[June 18, 2002, 16:15]
Athlon XP/2200+: workstation performance review
Reviews Here the Athlon XP/2200+ is nearly twice as fast as the Pentium 4/2200 with DDR266 memory. The brand-new OpenGL benchmark Viewperf 7 puts the AMD processors ahead of Intel’s chips. The difference in performance is particularly marked in the Data...
[June 18, 2002, 16:30]
Athlon XP/2600+: how we tested review
Reviews Athlon XP All tests are carried out under Windows XP Professional at 1,024 by 768 resolution and 32-bit colour depth. Benchmark tests used Benchmark type Benchmark name Application-based tests ZD Business Winstone 2001, ZD Content Creation Winstone...
[September 3, 2002, 15:35]
Athlon XP/2200+: how we tested review
Reviews Athlon XP/DDR333 All tests were carried out under Windows XP Professional at a resolution of 1,024 by 768 pixels and 32-bit colour depth. Benchmark type Benchmark name Application-based tests ZD Business Winstone 2001, ZD Content Creation Winstone...
[June 18, 2002, 16:04]
AMD Athlon XP review
Reviews If an Athlon XP can do more work per cycle, for instance, than a 'Thunderbird' Athlon running at the same clock speed, then to classify their performance simply in terms of gigahertz (i.e.clock speed) would be misleading.
[October 8, 2001, 0:00]
AMD's Athlon XP delivers on everyday performance
News New tests in ZDNet's labs have shown that a system built around AMD's latest chip -- the Athlon XP 1800+ -- running at 1.53GHz can outperform a 2GHz Intel P4 system when running mainstream and high-end productivity applications.
[October 9, 2001, 12:26]
Pentium 4 v Athlon XP: conclusion review
Reviews A test using a chipset that supports both DDR memory and the 533MHz FSB, expected later this month, will make an interesting comparison with the Athlon XP. The performance tests using Lightwave 7b and the DivX compression with Xmpeg certainly...
[May 16, 2002, 16:40]
Pentium 4 v Athlon XP: How we tested review
Reviews Athlon XP All tests were carried out under Windows XP Professional at a resolution of 1,024 by 768 pixels and 32-bit colour depth. However, the memory clock in this chipset remains unchanged at 400MHz, which means that it only supports PC800 memory.
[May 16, 2002, 16:34]
