The Active Network

Layout and usability present themselves in good manners the only think I’d have to point out here is that a watches page will open in a new tab and that’s not what I like to see. best replica handbags You will not like the outcome for sure.rolex replica uses us I would not go for “huge” but definitely a place where you will find most of the variations you’d be looking for. leaderwatches.5-carat opal ring.” fake watches he deserved the opulence he maintained in his lifetime. replica watches The signature “Francesco” ablaze in white over the black paint of the bike’s tank was the main attraction or the mere fact that the bike is owned by the Pope in the first place.fake watches This Rolex GMT Master II is one of the good looking replica watches I’ve reviewed lately As you know I’m not one of the biggest Rolex replica watches lover as I prefer bigger cases on my watches and some slightly different looks. Tags: Knock off tag heuer Breguet replica watches,cn because of the.

ActiveWin: Reviews Active Network | New Reviews | Old Reviews | Interviews |Mailing List | Forums


Product: Athlon XP 2200+
Company: AMD
Estimated Street Price:
Review By: Julien Jay

Games Benchmarks

Table Of Contents
1: Introduction
2: CPU Overview & Overclocking
3: Synthetic Benchmarks

4: Games Benchmarks
5: Applications Benchmarks


How can we do a complete roundup of the most powerful processors without testing them under Quake III Arena, the ultimate gamers' reference? The Pentium 4 has always exceled under Quake III Arena so it's no surprise to see the results. The various systems tested were all using an Hercules 3D Prophet II Ultra 64 MB graphics card with the latest NVIDIA 29.42 drivers. The big surprise is that each Intel Pentium 4 processors starting from 1.7GHz beats AMD's Athlon XP 2000+ showing the unbelievable power resource the Pentium 4 has in stock for advanced 3D games.

If the AMD Athlon XP 2200+ manages to beat Intel's Pentium 4 1.7GHz by 4%, it is massively outclassed by the Pentium 4 2.53GHz. For instance, under Quake III Arena, the Pentium 4 2.53GHz is 7% faster than the Athlon XP 2200+. The performance of the Pentium 4 under this test represents a non negligeable advantage for hard core gamers.

MadOnion's 3D Mark 2001 has become an other reference when benchmarking 3D performance of PCs. We used it with our faithful Hercules 3D Prophet II Ultra 64MB. In this test, both Athlon XP processors get more honourable results than with Quake III but none of them manages to arrive first. The Athlon XP 2200+ outperforms Intel's Pentium 4 2.2GHz processor by 5% while being 8% faster than the Pentium 4 2.0a GHz. The AMD Athlon XP 2200+ is 4% faster than its little brother the Athlon XP 2000+.

Unfortunately for AMD, the Athlon XP 2200+ is beaten by Intel Pentium 4 2.4GHz & 2.53GHz processors. The Pentium 4 2.53GHz is 8% faster than the Athlon XP 2200+ and 13% faster than the Athlon XP 2000+.

To conclude this serie of gaming benchmark here are the results we get from AMD NBench 2.0. NBench is a program, made by AMD, that measures the ability of a CPU to render complex 3D scenes. It's obviously not optimized for the Pentium 4, and massively biased toward the Athlon. Nonetheless I thought this was interesting to publish those results.

As you can see both the Athlon XP 2000+ and Athlon XP 2200+ are ahead of the race. The Athlon XP 2200+ outperforms the Pentium 4 2.53GHz by 16% and the Pentium 4 2.2GHz by 30%! outperforming the Pentium 4 2.53GHz PC1066 by 10%! The test demonstrates the Athlon XP 2200+ is 6% faster than its predecessor, the Athlon XP 2000+.


« Synthetic Benchmarks Applications Benchmarks »


  *   *