Navigate: Advice Beginners BIOS Guide CPUs Links Mainboards Memory Network Storage Video/Sound Cards Contact Forum SiteMap Sponsors WebNews Home	.	.
Prices: Mainboards ABIT ASUS Chaintech Shuttle Soyo Tyan CPU Intel P4 2.4C-800 P4 2.6C-800 P4 2.8C-800 P4 3.0-800 P4 3.2-800 AMD AthlonXP XP 1700+ XP 2000+ XP 2400+ XP 2500+ XP 2700+ XP 3000+ XP 3200+ Athlon64 Athlon64 3200+ Athlon64 FX-51 Opteron Opteron 240 Opteron 242 Opteron 244 Opteron 246 Memory Corsair Crucial Kingston Mushkin OCZ Search Prices:

LOSTCIRCUITS	SHORTCUTS: Top Page Test Configurations Test Configurations Overclocking Winstone Sysmark2004 3ds max Amorphium, Caligari Cinebench3 Gaming Benchmarks 64bit Performance, Conclusions Athlon64 3400+ Pricing Give Us Some Feedback to Help Us Improve our Reviews
AMD Athlon64 FX53 Back to the top
(Review by MS, March 18, 2004)

In the absence of too many applications that are ported yet to the 64 bit operating system, we did not delve too deep into the different performance results under the one or the other OS configurations. Moreover, at this point, there are still tons of driver issues to be weeded out, a case in point to show is the nVidia Blobby Dancer benchmark that is running just fine with the latest nVidia drivers under 64 bit Windows but will only generate errors if those drivers are not installed and instead the generic GeForce (Detonator) drivers are being used. The same goes for the ATI drivers embedded with the beta version of WindowsXP64, that, depending on the application either cause a ~ 20% performance hit compared to the 32bit version or else simply generate runtime errors. This appears a clear issue where ATI is way behind schedule and we have been talking to them and talking to them and talking some more to them.

The above illustrates a bit the issues faced when trying to compare WinXP and WinXP64 scores in that often enough there are driver issues involved that are generating false results, especially in 3D applications. We tried a few benchmarks that were mostly graphics dominated and some others that were more CPU and system limited such as the Amorphium and the Caligari benchmarks on one side of the spectrum and e.g. ViewPerf 7.0 and Comanche4 on the opposite azimuth.

To make a long story short, Amorphium ran on average 0.5% faster within WoW (32bit application in Windows on Windows), Caligari lost about 1% performance, Comanche4 dropped 20-30% depending on the driver version, and ViewPerf had results all over the place. What is important is that most CPU-intensive applications will run under WoW at the same speed as in a native Windows32 environment, the rest appears an issue with drivers.

Conclusion

It is another speed grade and it is very competitive. It has overclocking potential and is screaming fast already at default settings. In a nutshell, this is the verdict we have reached regarding the Athlon64 FX53. However, one must not overlook that the competition is not sleeping either and that Intel is just forging another set of weapons. Only time will tell how the next generations of processor will compare, at the moment, though, the FX53 is at the top.

next page:    => more =>