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:
Energy-Efficiency
CPU vs. System Power
CPU Specs and Numbers
Test Setup, Benchmark Overview
Idle Power, Prime95
3D Rendering Power
Cinebench 2003
Memory Subsystem
Access Latencies
3DMark '05 and Gaming Power
FarCry, Call of Duty2
F.E.A.R., Prey
DOOM3
Final Thoughts

Give Us Some Feedback on this Review

 Low Power and Energy-Efficient CPUs from Intel and AMD
Core2 Duo E6300 vs. X2-3800+ (ADD) and X2-4600+ (ADO)
(Review by MS, August 20, 2006)

Memory Subsystem II

Access Latencies Athlon 64 4600+ vs 5000+:

The 4600+ (solid blocks) shows slightly better access latencies across the board than the 5000+

One of the biggest issues originally associated with DDR2 were its access latencies compared to the first generation DDR. DDR2 has come a long way though and especially the 800 MHz versions not only increase the overall throughput but also effectively cut the nominal latencies in half. Also, the controllers are getting better and better. In other words, we thought it was, once again, time for a reevaluation of the two different technologies in a direct comparison using identical speed grades of CPU with the same cache size. In this case, we are using the Socket 939 X2-3800+ on an ASUS A8N-SLI board with 2 x 512 MB of low latency PC3200 DDR at 2:2:2:7 vs. the AM2 "ADD" X2-3800 on the Foxconn "C51" board with 2 x 1024 MB of PC6400 DDR2 at 4:4:4:12 (CL:tRCD:tRP:tRAS).

Against all odds, the AM2 (DDR2) platform (solid blocks) shows lower (better) access latencies than the DDR(1) platform (transparent blocks) with nominally lower latency memory. On second thought, however, everything else being equal, the lesser bus contention of the DDR2 technology appears to finally pay of.

AMD vs. Intel

Finally we have a direct comparison between the AM2 X2-3800 (green) against the E6300 (blue) across different data chunk sizes at 2 kB Stride length. Note the increase in latency at the 2MB block size caused by the half-cache size limitation of 2MB.

Athlon64 X2-3800+
(ADA3800DAA5CD)
Core2 Duo E6300
(HH80557PH0362M)

next page: => Gaming Performance =>

All advice and educational articles on LostCircuits are free, but if you feel you can, please make a small donation to us!
Thank you!

General disclaimer: This page only reflects the author's personal opinion and assumes no responsibility whatsoever regarding any of the contents or any damages that may occur explicitly or implicitly from reading the contents of this site. All names and trademarks mentioned in this review are the exclusive property of the respective parent companies.
All contents of this site are protected by international copyright laws. Reproduction of the contents even in parts is not allowed except after written permission by the author and referral to this site.
Copyright 2002 - 2008 LostCircuits