Slashdot Mirror
AMD's Athlon-64 Benchmarked With UT2003
Sander Sassen writes "Wondering about the performance of AMD's Athlon-64? Want to how well it runs in 64-bit mode? Hardware Analysis managed to run a few benchmarks on a AMD Athlon-64 demo system using the 64-bit version of Epic' Unreal Tournament 2003. There's also an update with the latest about Athlon-64, Opteron and mobile Athlon-64 including streaming video and pictures of a quad Opteron server."
how to slashdot an innocent server in the dead of night.
As promised we'll give you an update on the performance and other features of the AMD systems that we reported on yesterday. Naturally AMD wasn't very keen on disclosing clockspeed or detailed system configurations of the demo systems they had running, but we took advantage of a few fellow journalists entering the room and keeping the AMD PR people busy to run a few quick benchmarks on the Athlon-64 system. The Athlon-64 demo system we already reported on yesterday had a 2GHz clockspeed and used the SuSe 64-bit Linux operating system and was running the 64-bit version of Unreal Tournament 2003 as a demo.
(pic of monitor playing UT2k3, FPS = 42)
Fig 1. The Athlon-64 system running SuSe 64-bit Linux and the 64-bits version of Unreal Tournament 2003.
Naturally we're intimately familiar with the workings of Unreal Tournament 2003 engine and after a quick look at the display settings, which were set at a 1024x768x32bit resolution with all other features at default, we measured a mere average 42fps and maximum fps around the 55...60fps mark. Considering the fact that this is a 2GHz Athlon-64 processor teamed up with a GeForce Ti 4600 we honestly expected a whole lot better. A 1.6GHz Pentium 4 with that very same GeForce Ti 4600 videocard would have no problems clocking in a similar score while running under Windows XP.
(pic of a white laptop with the terminal showing)
Fig 3. The Athlon-64 notebook running CyberLink's PowerDVD actually showing the first Harry Potter movie.
But there's more, we managed to take a closer look at the notebook too and quickly found out that this indeed is a proof of concept. It plays DVDs very well, mostly courtesy of the ATi M9-series graphics card, and unfortunately all our questions about whether we could do something else with it were answered with a resounding 'no'. We did however manage to find out what was inside in terms of chipset, memory and graphics card. The notebook apparently used a Via K8T400M chipset teamed up with an ATi M9-series graphics adapter and was using PC2100, DDR266, memory. The screen was a standard 14.1 inch running at a 1024x768 resolution and the DVD software they used was none other than CyberLink's PowerDVD.
(naked pizza-box style case)
Fig 2. The quad Opteron server with the top cover removed, the PCI-X slots in the back and a the four CPUs hidden underneath the huge heatsinks.
(two white LCDs next to each other, left showing a web browser and right showing UT2k3.)
Fig 3. The quad Opteron with the SuSe 64-bit Linux operating system running some sort of a database benchmark, right next to the UT2003 demo machine.
We naturally also took a closer look at the quad Opteron as that's definitely something AMD is currently pushing hard. They're putting all their weight behind the launch of their server products and have postponed the launch of the desktop version of the Opteron, the Athlon-64, back to September. The server parts, including completely pre-configured two-way Opteron systems, should be available in late April, right after the April 26th launch of the Opteron server CPU family. Clockspeeds will initially range up to 1.6 or 1.8GHz and performance is expected to be similar to Intel's Xeon offerings. But as always, we'll reserve judgement until we can actually evaluate two similarly configured servers side by side, for now all they have given us are SpecInt-2000 and SpecFP-2000 scores without disclosing the system configurations, so that doesn't tell us anything.
Nevertheless it looks like AMD is indeed trying to get some new and innovative products out of the door. Whether they'll be able to make a lasting impression, both in terms of features and performance, with their new 64-bit products remains to be seen though, we'll be sure to keep a close eye on any future developments.
Sander Sassen.
Ok, wait.
I'm the developer that did the 64-bit port of UT2003 (and the Linux port, and the Mac port...).
You need to keep two things in mind:
1) The OpenGL renderer is not as fast as the Direct3D renderer at this time. This is not the Athlon64's fault. You can see this on 32-bit Windows, since it can use both renderers. Since this is a Linux port of the game, we're using the GL renderer on the Athlon64 at this time.
2) The "stat fps" command isn't really a good benchmarking method.
3) This is a prerelease version of the game running on a prerelease version of SuSE running on prerelease drivers running on prerelease hardware. Please don't consider this "benchmark" to be representative!
--ryan.
Don't say, "don't quote me," because if no one quotes you, you probably haven't said a thing worth saying.
The reason you keep losing at UT isn't because your processor is too slow.
I have been pwned because my
how well are the drivers for the gefore card working? are they playing nice with that k8t400? are the nvidia drivers 64bit or are they being run in "32-bit" mode? how well is OpenGL playing with the 64-bit OS, 64-bit Chip combo and again, how well are the nvidia drivers playing? is the OS running the AGP in AGP mode or is it PCI mode?
i bet i could easily get a P4 2.7 with this graphics card to product similar numbers, or even worse in linux with some effort to use least optimized drivers and setting the graphics card to PCI.
in fact, my P4 2.4x133@2.7x150 with a GF Ti 4600 doesn't post much better numbers, 55fps by stat fps. and thats on a 32bit "system" with fairly mature drivers and everything work "correctly/fullspeed"
im not an AMD zealot, but i wont make me decision based on a game that is notoriously bad at opengl and on a system that is running all beta software/drivers.
Let's not get over-excited... This is of course interresting information, but it's information of a premature chip on a premature platform.
I doubt that any proper conclusions can be drawn from this, apart from what is already known: The Athlon 64 isn't ready yet. If was the release date wouldn't be set for September.
Much like with Doom III, there is always a cool-factor, but the actual facts at hand are very scarse. One thing is probably for sure though... The Hammer core can't compete with the Barton core on the desktop at this point. Otherwise we'd have the Athlon 64 waiting to be released much sooner.
.: Max Romantschuk
If one compares the claimed 42fps with other cpu:s, it seems it is at a level of a Celeron 500 MHz...
There is something fishy here as the UT2k3-makers themselves claimed there is a 15% increase in 64-bit mode (on Windows). Normally Quake3Arena for Linux is on par with the Windows version, so it should not be the OS' fault either.
INTEL DEVELOPER FORUM CONFERENCE, SAN JOSE, Calif., Feb. 21, 2003 -- Intel Corporation today announced the new successor for the Itanic 2 processor, named "Unobtainium".
This highly advanced clone of a 64-bit processor of an unnamed competitor is the first to combine a competitor's technology with the outstanding features of Intel processors, namely lots of Gigahertz, and lots of heat. The Unobtainium has been especially designed to be used on expeditions on Antarctica, always keeping expedition members in a bubble of hot air.
Intel, the world's largest chip maker, is a leading manufacturer of computer, networking and communications products. Additional information about Intel is available at www.intel.com/pressroom.
A monkey is doing the real work for me.
I recently got into video editing. Until now, I've never needed anything faster than a single CPU system.
Now I understand, completely, what those who do rendering gripe about when it comes to CPU speed never being fast enough.
2:57 of video takes my 1GHz w/ 1GB RAM machine nearly 2 HOURS to render. Just for 3 stinking minutes of video!
The fastest current single CPU would only decrease that number to about 40 minutes, which is still too slow.
A dual CPU solution would bring it down to 20 minutes, but again, if I ever wanted to render even 15 minutes of video, that would be 1 hr 40 mins of CPU time.
And forget doing anything else with the computer while it's rendering. It will start dropping frames like mad, and you have to start over.
Now a 4-way workstation is something that would work. With a 4-way 3GHz Opteron system, I could render in near real-time, and a regular sized MB, if not slightly oversized, could handle 4 procs.
SuperMicro is the only MB mfg. I know of that makes a 4-way board, but it's for Xeons and is insanely expensive ($1800 +/- $100) and that's before you add the overpriced CPUs.
If AMD came out with a moderately prices 4-way workstation, they could get the CAD/CAM, video editing, 3D modeling, rendering and compiling crowd all at once, in addition to the freak gamers and Gotta Have The Best Even Though I'll Never Use It crowds.
The 4-way system is a neglected niche. AMD should fill it.
Talisman
"Study your math, kids. Key to the universe." -The Archangel Gabriel
Well, not directly answering your question, but... x86-64 (the 64 bit architecture that the Athlon64s and Opterons use) is more than just more bits. There are also a lot more registers which will help out code that is recompiled, because programs won't need to do do quite as much moving of values into and out of memory (or cache, I guess). There are other improvements too, but I think the register count is one of the most important ones - with respect to playing games at least. =)
There was nothing to this artice. Here is what I learned from reading this article: 1)there's a 64-bit linux port of UT 2003 2)amd likes secrecy 3)the people who were showing off the laptop like Harry Potter wow. now wasn't that informative?