We're going to look at the nForce2 version 2.0 with a Barton 2500+, and then the 2.4B/533 and 2.4C/800 procs with both the 865PE and 875P.
|AMD NF2||Intel Springdale||Intel Canterwood|
|Motherboard||Abit NF7-S rev2.0||MSI 865PE-LS||Abit IC7|
|CPU||Barton 2500+||2.4B/533 & 2.4C/800|
|GFX||R9700 Pro Cat 3.2, default performance settings|
|Memory||2*256mb Kingston HyperX PC3500|
|HD||WD Raptor 10k SATA drive|
|OS||WinXP Pro SP1, DX 9.0a|
When I say exactly, I mean I used the exact same pieces for each scenario...I wanted to eliminate any possible variance.
For a brief moment, I was going to do a stock cooling comparison, but as I learned last time, this makes AMD rather boring. So, for the Barton, I ended up using an SLK 800-U cooler, and a freakin' loud Delta 6800rpm fan. I had a regular 80mm on there, but it just couldn't handle 2.0v, so I went to the hair dryer. For Intel, I stuck to my guns, and stayed with the stock Intel heatsink.
Everything else is bone stock...no other mods. I'm doing it this way, because I wanted to represent what can happen for the average, everyday air overclocker, just looking to get their bang-for-the buck. Hopefully anyone, from the hardcore to the newbie, can take something good away from the comparisons and tendencies of these platform results.
The tests run are Sandra 2003 Memory Bandwidth, Comanche default 640x480, Quake III 1.17 demo001 default Fastest, Jedi Knight II jk2ffa default Fastest, Unreal Tournament Flyby and Botmatch with Anand's HQ scripts at 640x480, and 3DMark 2001 SE at both 640x480 and 1024x768 default. What I'm trying to accomplish here is a good platform versus platform comparison, so I used the lowest default settings on each bench, to help take away the video card bottleneck. I also ran 3DMark at default, because it's so recognizable. Should prove interesting.