nForce2 vs. KT600

optim · 2004-07-10, 15:05

Can someone tell me why the difference in MPrime benchmark 1792K FFT between these two machines? is it the amount of memory, the dual channel, of the Nvidia/VIA chipsets?

Machine1:
Athlon 2600+ Barton
Asus systemboard with NVidia nForce2 chipset
1GB Kingston ValieRAM DDR333 RAM, 2x512MB, dual channel
SuSE Linux 9.1 OS
150ms in 1792K FFT MPrime benchmark

Machine2:
Athlon 2600+ Barton
Abit systemboard with VIA KT600 chipset
512MB Kingston ValieRAM DDR333 RAM, 1x512MB, single channel
SuSE Linux 9.1 OS
177ms in 1792K FFT MPrime benchmark

Jeff Gilchrist · 2004-07-11, 14:45

Is probably a combination of the Dual channel RAM (since mprime does push a lot of data around memory) and also possibly differences in the Nvidia vs VIA chipsets themselves.

Try pulling 1 stick of RAM chips from your NForce board so it goes back to single channel mode and re-bench to see the difference.

Jeff.

E_tron · 2004-07-11, 23:02

it's the dual channel memory. 2.66Gb/sec vs. 5.4Gb/sec... yeah, its the memory.

Here is another example, my older K7 Athlon and Thunderbird Athlon machines. Their motherboards will take DDR or SDR memory(100mhz FSB). 1.6Gb/sec vs. 790Mb/sec. On average, they will lose about 30ms with SDR memory.

optim · 2004-07-12, 00:38

what matters most in MPrime? memory bandwidth or memory latency?

xtreme2k · 2004-07-12, 09:00

To me the problem might be something else other then the memory bandwidth.

Athlon has a 64bit FSBat 400MHz it has a bandwidth of 3.2GB/s. Giving it dual channel will make HARDLY any (<5%) difference in performance. Because the CPU cannot make use of the extra bandwidth. Dual Channel DDR400 gives 6.4GB/s, while your CPU only takes 3.2GB/s. If your CPU is on 333MHz FSB it will only take 2.7GB/s.

Are you 100% sure the 2600+ are both the same. You know some AMD chips has different MHz and FSB but gives the same PR rating, that might account for the difference in speed. ANother idea might be some programs might be hogging your CPU while you do the benchmark. Or maybe a combination of things. Slower chipset and slower BIOS settings etc etc.

To me Prime95 is extremely optimised on for caches therefore the memory speed will only make a very SMALL difference. But thats on the P4. On P4 on 533FSB Bus, Single DDR333, vs a P4 on 800Mhz Bus and Dual channel DDR400, the difference per clock is EXTREMELY small. However this maybe different on the Athlon I am not too sure.

optim · 2004-07-12, 15:15

the CPUs are exactly the same, same MHz.

Jeff Gilchrist · 2004-07-12, 18:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by optim

the CPUs are exactly the same, same MHz.

Did you try yanking the extra memory stick out of your NForce board and re-test to see the difference?

Jeff.

outlnder · 2004-07-15, 05:18

How can you possibly compare an NVidia chipset to a Via chipset.

I thought it was common knowledge that Via chipsets suck.

E_tron · 2004-07-19, 18:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by outlnder

How can you possibly compare an NVidia chipset to a Via chipset.

I thought it was common knowledge that Via chipsets suck.

no... it's just nVidia is far superior to its competitors

2004-07-10, 15:05	#1
optim Nov 2003 European Union 2³·13 Posts	nForce2 vs. KT600 Can someone tell me why the difference in MPrime benchmark 1792K FFT between these two machines? is it the amount of memory, the dual channel, of the Nvidia/VIA chipsets? Machine1: Athlon 2600+ Barton Asus systemboard with NVidia nForce2 chipset 1GB Kingston ValieRAM DDR333 RAM, 2x512MB, dual channel SuSE Linux 9.1 OS 150ms in 1792K FFT MPrime benchmark Machine2: Athlon 2600+ Barton Abit systemboard with VIA KT600 chipset 512MB Kingston ValieRAM DDR333 RAM, 1x512MB, single channel SuSE Linux 9.1 OS 177ms in 1792K FFT MPrime benchmark

2004-07-12, 09:00	#5
xtreme2k Aug 2002 2·3·29 Posts	To me the problem might be something else other then the memory bandwidth. Athlon has a 64bit FSBat 400MHz it has a bandwidth of 3.2GB/s. Giving it dual channel will make HARDLY any (<5%) difference in performance. Because the CPU cannot make use of the extra bandwidth. Dual Channel DDR400 gives 6.4GB/s, while your CPU only takes 3.2GB/s. If your CPU is on 333MHz FSB it will only take 2.7GB/s. Are you 100% sure the 2600+ are both the same. You know some AMD chips has different MHz and FSB but gives the same PR rating, that might account for the difference in speed. ANother idea might be some programs might be hogging your CPU while you do the benchmark. Or maybe a combination of things. Slower chipset and slower BIOS settings etc etc. To me Prime95 is extremely optimised on for caches therefore the memory speed will only make a very SMALL difference. But thats on the P4. On P4 on 533FSB Bus, Single DDR333, vs a P4 on 800Mhz Bus and Dual channel DDR400, the difference per clock is EXTREMELY small. However this maybe different on the Athlon I am not too sure. Last fiddled with by xtreme2k on 2004-07-12 at 09:03

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
HOWTO: enable the HLT command on nforce2 chipsets with freeware utils!	graysky	Hardware	4	2004-10-17 10:23

2004-07-11, 14:45	#2
Jeff Gilchrist Jun 2003 Ottawa, Canada 3·17·23 Posts	Is probably a combination of the Dual channel RAM (since mprime does push a lot of data around memory) and also possibly differences in the Nvidia vs VIA chipsets themselves. Try pulling 1 stick of RAM chips from your NForce board so it goes back to single channel mode and re-bench to see the difference. Jeff.

2004-07-11, 23:02	#3
E_tron Sep 2002 Austin, TX 231₁₆ Posts	it's the dual channel memory. 2.66Gb/sec vs. 5.4Gb/sec... yeah, its the memory. Here is another example, my older K7 Athlon and Thunderbird Athlon machines. Their motherboards will take DDR or SDR memory(100mhz FSB). 1.6Gb/sec vs. 790Mb/sec. On average, they will lose about 30ms with SDR memory.

2004-07-12, 00:38	#4
optim Nov 2003 European Union 2³·13 Posts	what matters most in MPrime? memory bandwidth or memory latency?

2004-07-12, 15:15	#6
optim Nov 2003 European Union 2³×13 Posts	the CPUs are exactly the same, same MHz.

2004-07-15, 05:18	#8
outlnder Aug 2002 2×3×53 Posts	How can you possibly compare an NVidia chipset to a Via chipset. I thought it was common knowledge that Via chipsets suck.