PCMark can be used on desktop PC's, Laptops and
even Workstations and tests everyday computing from home to office
usage. PCMark specifically stresses the CPU, memory subsystem, graphics
subsystem, hard drives, WindowsXP GUI (if WinXP is used), video performance and
even laptop batteries.
PCMark
loves the Intel P4, that should be
pretty evident here. In the memory portion of the benchmark the Athlon64 and Albatron K8X800
Pro II do very well for each other despite only having half the
bandwidth.
By combining DirectX8 support with completely new
graphics, it continues to provide good overall system benchmarks. 3DMark2001 SE
has been created in cooperation with the major 3D accelerator and processor
manufacturers to provide a reliable set of diagnostic tools. The suite
demonstrates 3D gaming performance by using real-world gaming
technology to test a system's true performance abilities. Tests
include: DirectX8 Vertex Shaders, Pixel Shaders and Point Sprites, DOT3 and
Environment Mapped Bump Mapping, support for Full Scene Anti-aliasing and
Texture Compression and two game tests using Ipion real-time physics. Higher
3DMark scores denote better performance.
| 3DMark2001 SE
Benchmark Results |
|
Processor |
3DMarks |
Ranking |
| 1. |
P4 3.2C/Intel
D875PBZ (200/400) |
18305 |
 |
| 2. |
AXP 3200+/Albatron KX18DProII (200/400) |
18057 |
|
| 3. |
A64 3200+/MSI K8T
Neo (200/400) |
20322 |
|
| 4. |
A64
3200+/Albatron K8X800ProII (200/400) |
20072 |
 |
| 5. |
A64 3200+/Albatron
K8X800ProII (245/407) |
20416 |
|
I'm a bit
surprised to see
that the MSI K8T Neo performs so much faster then the Albatron K8X800 Pro II.
I ran the test several times and the Albatron board always scored the same. I
think MSI may have tweaked their board for 3DMark as I also have an Epox 8HDA3+ and
it scores around the same as the Albatron K8X800 Pro II.
PCMark 2002
RSS Newsletter
