Pentium 4 vs Athlon Benchmarks and Price Analysis

[Arcadian]

There has been some recent discussion here as to whether the Pentium 4 was even an option in terms of a processor upgrade. Some people claim that the Pentium 4 has aweful performance, and generally, some benchmarks tend to show this. With prices as high as they are for the Pentium 4, it may first seem like an uncompelling choice.

This next year, though, the Athlon and Pentium 4 are going to remain the high performance alternatives. Some people are likely to find better value with AMD, and others are looking for better stability with Intel.

Therefore, I wanted to do an alalysis, and a recent issue of PC Magazine has prompted me to want to include some more benchmarks that happen to be newer on the market.

First, the contendors. I will be listing the scores and prices for a 1.0GHz AMD Athlon with 128MB of SDR SDRAM memory and a KT133 chipset. There will also be a 1.2GHz Athlon with the same memory and chipset. Finally, a 1.2GHz Athlon with DDR memory and an AMD 760 based chipset. From Intel, PC Magazine decided to test a 1.0GHz Pentium III Processor with SDR SDRAM and an i815 based chipset, and a 1.5GHz Pentium 4 with RDRAM and the i850 chipset.

First, let's discuss prices. I will be using the fifth from the top price on Pricewatch.com. The KT133 chipset will be the Asus A7V, the memory will be CAS2 PC133. The AMD760 chipset will be the Asus A7M266 and memory will be PC2100 CAS3. The i815 chipset will be the Asus CUSL-C, and the i850 chipset will be the Asus P4T. Scores may be slightly off (PC Magazine doesn't state exact motherboard used, but I expect error to be less than 2%), but pricing was important, so I decided to pick high quality parts.

Athlon 1.0GHz and SDR
Processor - $176
Chipset - $133
Memory - $88
Total - $395

Athlon 1.2GHz and SDR
Processor - $265
Chipset - $133
Memory - $88
Total - $466

Athlon 1.2GHz and DDR
Processor - $265
Chipset - $204
Memory - $178
Total - $647

Pentium III 1.0GHz and SDR
Processor - $327
Chipset - $113
Memory - $88
Total - $528

Pentium 4 1.5GHz and RDRAM
Processor - $855
Chipset - $245
Memory - $162
Total - $1262

Analysis
Obviously, the Pentium 4 is insanely overpriced, and price drops are in order. I would think that unless the price of Pentium 4 + memory + motherboard does not decrease to half, the more compelling solution would be the Athlon with DDR. Giving the benefit of the doubt, though, the Pentium 4 is brand new, and for a long time, the 1GHz Pentium III was almost $1000. However, with compeition as fierce as it is, Intel can use some very serious price drops, or at least a higher performing product.

I would think that if the 1.0GHz system drops to around $450, and the 1.5GHz Pentium 4 system drops to around $650 for processor + motherboard + memory, then that would be a good price to buy. But let's check out the benchmarks.

Business Winstone 2001
Athlon 1.0GHz + SDR - 33.9
Athlon 1.2GHz + SDR - 41.0
Athlon 1.2GHz + DDR - 46.2
Pentium III 1.0GHz - 41.0
Pentium 4 1.5GHz - 42.4

Analysis
This benchmark is clearly office based, with applications that the Pentium 4 was not designed to run. However, it is also applications that people use the most. It's a good thing that the Pentium 4 beats the Pentium III, but not beating the DDR Athlon setup puts the Pentium 4 at a severe disadvantage, since the price difference is so huge. At one half the cost, the Athlon performs higher in this test. The Pentium III, though, posts as interesting result, as it ties with the 1.2GHz SDR Athon, even though it is clocked 200MHz slower.

Content Creation Winstone 2001
Athlon 1.0GHz + SDR - 44.2
Athlon 1.2GHz + SDR - 52.6
Athlon 1.2GHz + DDR - 61.3
Pentium III 1.0GHz - 50.8
Pentium 4 1.5GHz - 55.6

Analysis
Here Intel has a big problem. The DDR Athlon soundly passes the Pentium 4, and for that matter the Athlon with SDR. Content Creation Winstone is for measuring multitasking performance while running very intensive apps. These are common apps, though, and the Pentium 4 should be doing better for the price. However, the Pentium 4 again beats the Pentium III and the Athlon with SDR, and the 1.0GHz Athlon again wipes the rear. Not bad performance for the cost, though.

3D Winmark 2000
Athlon 1.0GHz + SDR - 178
Athlon 1.2GHz + SDR - 193
Athlon 1.2GHz + DDR - 209
Pentium III 1.0GHz - 162
Pentium 4 1.5GHz - 221

Analysis
Here we finally have a justification for the higher priced Pentium 4, though not by much. In 3D apps, the Pentium 4 does get a lead over the Athlon with DDR. 3D Winmark does include some SSE optimizations, which is clearly the reason for the higher score. The interesting thing here is that the Pentium III clearly shows its age, while the Athlon shows its floating point power. It's just not enough to beat the Pentium 4 in what it was designed to do.

3D Winbench 2000 Processor Test
Athlon 1.0GHz + SDR - 2.0
Athlon 1.2GHz + SDR - 2.1
Athlon 1.2GHz + DDR - 2.5
Pentium III 1.0GHz - 1.8
Pentium 4 1.5GHz - 2.4

Analysis
We see the same results here as earlier. In 3D the Pentium 4 outdoes the Pentium III by a wide margin (33%), but not enough to beat an Athlon with DDR this time. It's too bad for the Pentium 4, too, because this benchmark uses DirectX 8, which has some SSE instructions enabled (though SSE2 and further optimizations may help things later on).

I-Bench - Loading Web Pages (Total)
Athlon 1.0GHz + SDR - 68 seconds
Athlon 1.2GHz + SDR - 57 seconds
Athlon 1.2GHz + DDR - 54 seconds
Pentium III 1.0GHz - 70 seconds
Pentium 4 1.5GHz - 62 seconds

Analysis
Here Intel processors generally lag behind the Athlon. Even the SDR Athlon system outpaces the Pentium 4 by 5 seconds. 5 Seconds may not seem long, but over more complex pages and a long enough time, these differences add up. Plus, for the cost of Intel solutions right now, they aren't much faster. The Internet is what many people use for their computers, so this test should be considered valid.

Quake III
Athlon 1.0GHz + SDR - 151.3
Athlon 1.2GHz + SDR - 167.2
Athlon 1.2GHz + DDR - 183.7
Pentium III 1.0GHz - 156.3
Pentium 4 1.5GHz - 218.6

Analysis
Here it comes... obviously a lot of you know already that Quake III favors the Pentium 4, so no surprise here. It is interesting, though, that DDR memory still does not come close to beating the Pentium 4. One thing I want to mention, though, is that Quake III has absolutely no SSE optimizations, and it wasn't built to favor Intel processors. It simply demonstrates that highly graphics intensive 3D apps do better on the Pentium 4. This also shows that clock for clock, the Pentium III is even faster than the Athlon in certain 3D apps.

MP3 Encoding
Athlon 1.0GHz + SDR - 3:44 minutes:seconds
Athlon 1.2GHz + SDR - 3:11 ""
Athlon 1.2GHz + DDR - 3:10 ""
Pentium III 1.0GHz - 4:02 ""
Pentium 4 1.5GHz - 2:58 ""

Analysis
Here, you can see that for encoding MP3s, the Pentium 4 has the highest performance. We also see that DDR memory really doesn't help the Athlon to get a much higher score. The Pentium III is really lagging here, but the Pentium 4 shaves more than a minute off of that time. Not bad, but is it worth the cost? Maybe if you are doing a lot of MP3 encoding .

Photoshop 6 Scores (total time)
Athlon 1.0GHz + SDR - 1:43 minutes:seconds
Athlon 1.2GHz + SDR - 1:31 ""
Athlon 1.2GHz + DDR - 1:24 ""
Pentium III 1.0GHz - 1:27 ""
Pentium 4 1.5GHz - 1:06 ""

Analysis
Here, we see that Photoshop must have a fair amount of SSE optmizations. The Intel systems are clearly ahead, and even the Pentium III closely approaches the DDR Athlon. The Pentium 4 is also way ahead of the pack. Clearly, the Pentium 4 was designed for graphics programs and 3D over office applications or Internet web page loading.

SPEC2000 Integer
Athlon 1.0GHz + SDR - 379
Athlon 1.2GHz + SDR - 430
Athlon 1.2GHz + DDR - 461
Pentium III 1.0GHz - 459
Pentium 4 1.5GHz - 535

Analysis
What SPEC tends to show as a benchmark is how much optimizations can affect a processor. The SPEC benchmarks are extremely highly optimized, and it clearly shows that the Pentium 4 was designed with optimizations to take fully advantage of the hardware. Intel's Pentium III almost reaches towards the DDR Athlon, and the Pentium 4 takes the gold by a long shot. This makes a shiny future for the Pentium 4, as more future applications are likely to see optimizations.

SPEC2000 Floating Point
Athlon 1.0GHz + SDR - 321
Athlon 1.2GHz + SDR - 349
Athlon 1.2GHz + DDR - 412
Pentium III 1.0GHz - 313
Pentium 4 1.5GHz - 558

Analysis
Here we can see that the Athlon's great floating point engine powers it past the Pentium III. We can also see that DDR has the ability to bring the Athlon great performance. The surprising thing, though, is that the Pentium 4 blows everything out of the water. Clearly, the Pentium 4 needs to be optimized, and the floating point engine is one that can really benefit, even over the Athlon FPU. We'll have to see if other applications can benefit as well as SPEC in the future.

Thanks
Thanks for reading this long post, but I found these scores interesting, and I wanted to share them. This post is quite long, even for me. However, I appreciate any feedback on what your opinions might be for these scores, or if you agree with my analysis. Clearly, the price of the Pentium 4 needs to drop significantly, but we also see that there are many apps that can already take advantage of the Pentium 4, and it is likely to turn into a very compelling solution. Right now, though, in the apps that we use most, the Pentium 4 really needs to be lowered in price before most people should consider it. AMD is being very agressive at this time, and we already know that the income was flat this past quarter due to lowering their average selling prices (ASPs) from $90 to $80. They are out for blood, but the question is whether they can continue to produce better processors.

Again, reply if you have anything to add.

[Bateluer]

Nice, very informative. I would buy an Athlon over the P4 because of the price and neglible performance differences.
The P4 is way over priced and performs neck and neck with the 1.2/DDR when you look at all the benches.
I think you over looked the OC'ing capabilities of the P4 though, a friend of mine bought a 1.4Ghz P4 with the Asus P4T and he OC'ed it to 1.8 Ghz. The P4 can likely increase in clock speeds much quicker than the Athlon right now as well.

And, as you pointed out, there is no gareuantee that AMD will repeat the Athlon. We'll likely have to wait and see how the palomine, Sledgehammer and clawhammer perform. Although the Hammer line looks solid and AMD is lining up some high industry people to support it.


------------------
Boo Points, I punch! Well, actually, Boo just kinda runs, but I still punch, Yessir!

[The WhiteRabbit]

Excellent post, very interesting.

Once the P4 makes the switch to Northwood, it may be worth considering (assming the price has dropped significantly by that time) for more users.

For now, I can see no real reason to go with Intel for building a new system, given the price difference between the two Athlon 1.2 GHz systems and the PIII 1 GHz system. Further, the DDR platform also offers something that neither of the intel offerings currently have. . . a definite upgrade path.

It will be interesting to see how things shape up over the next year or so, and how AMDs hammer line performs, particularly since it is supposed to include the SSE2 instruction set, so SSE2 optimizations should no longer give the P4 an advantage. Of course, implemenation of those instructions can still certainly make a difference, but I think AMD has some excellent prospects for the future.

------------------
ABit KT7-Raid
AMD Duron 600@1066 (101x10.5)
FOP38-1 (34 C - 40 C)
256 MB of Crucial CAS2 PC133@135
30 GB IBM Deskstar GXP75
Ricoh 6x4x32x CD-RW 7080A
Pioneer 16x Slot DVD-105
GeForce2 GTS (230/392)
Diamond MX300 (Vortex2)
7650 3DMarks (Mad Onion's 3DMark 2000)

[djocyko]

That q3 test. It has been stated that the Det3 drivers used for the grfx cards in these tests were in fact p4 optimized. when you take this into account, the p4 is almost equal to a p3 in performance on a clock to clock comparison.

Believe what you may.

------------------
C366 @ 366Mhz
Abit BH6 440BX newest BIOS
128 PC100 & 128 PC133, running at CAS2
Asus V3400 16MB TNT (video in/out)
Diamond MX300 (Aureal 3d)
WD 10GByte 5400 + IBM 75GXP 30Gbyte 7200 ATA/100
No Name 32X CD
Mitsumi 4X CD-R
2 NICs
In an Enlight 7237 at 250 watts

soon will be a p3 800 @ 100FBS with a Promise ATA/100 controller

[Bateluer]

Will the P4 have a SMP compatible chipset when Northwood is released? The Hammer line is supposed to, and the 760MP(770?) chipset for the athlon is supposed to be coming real soon.
Dual athlons would rock, and likely by half the cost of a single P4 to boot.

------------------
Boo Points, I punch! Well, actually, Boo just kinda runs, but I still punch, Yessir!

[syk0]

I think the P4 has a lot going for it, it has a lot of new optimizations etc and probably won't be fully utilized until developers start supporting it in new releases of programs/games/etc.

I found this article on Tweak3d to describe a lot about the P4s features.
http://www.tweak3d.net/reviews/intel/p4/

While I don't really favor Intel or AMD, I must say that the P4 looks great, but yes it is extremely overpriced as of now and it seems you'd get more for your money with AMD. It will be even more interesting when AMD releases their next processor how Intel will react.

[pompadorean]

Arcadian, you have once again put together a long and beautiful post. you should be a mod for this post!

P4 isn't worth it. It may be in a whlie once things utilize SSE2 but by the the new AMD procs will probably kick its but. AMD all the way!

------------------
-T-bird 850 (i'm going to OC once my Fop 38 arrives)(i have a bigmofoho from www.3dfxcool.com on the way too.)
-128 megs of Pc133 bargain brand (I'm getting 256megs of ram once my pc160 cas2 comes in the mail from jkdude!137.55 for 2 128's!)
-Abit KT7
-geforce 2 MX
-10gig HD 5400rpm (boo)
-sony cd burner 4x write 2x rewrite (i got it for 35$!)

[Humus]

Originally posted by Arcadian:

Here it comes... obviously a lot of you know already that Quake III favors the Pentium 4, so no surprise here. It is interesting, though, that DDR memory still does not come close to beating the Pentium 4. One thing I want to mention, though, is that Quake III has absolutely no SSE optimizations, and it wasn't built to favor Intel processors. It simply demonstrates that highly graphics intensive 3D apps do better on the Pentium 4. This also shows that clock for clock, the Pentium III is even faster than the Athlon in certain 3D apps.

Are you sure Quake 3 does not have any SSE optimizations? I cannot disprove that, but since every site on the net that care to comment on that has said that it is SSE optimized (aswell as 3dnow! optimized). You're the first one I see claim the opposite.

[FaTs]

I think he means SEE-2.

I read the review on sharky about the 1.3ghz P4 i was disaponited that they didn't take it out and place it in another m/b and see if it o/c'd . If that chip could reach 1.8ghz it would be a decent buy. Expsensive but bloody fast.

------------------
General FaTs
Knight of Emperor Sapasion

Cel 600@1134 (Fop38-1)
ASUS CUSL2
256mb Kingmax (512mg of PC-150 on the way)
Creative GF2 Ultra
30 gig IBM 75xg
20 gig Segate ATA 66
SBLive! Value

[Bateluer]

I doubt know about 3dnow, but Q3 has SSE1 optimizations.
P4 might only be worth it after the move to Northwood.

Any truth the rumor that Intel scrapped the Roman Numeral system on the P4 b/c people couldn't read higher than 3(III) and wouldn't stand that IV is 4 in roman numerals?

------------------
Boo Points, I punch! Well, actually, Boo just kinda runs, but I still punch, Yessir!

[Arcadian]

Originally posted by Humus:
Are you sure Quake 3 does not have any SSE optimizations? I cannot disprove that, but since every site on the net that care to comment on that has said that it is SSE optimized (aswell as 3dnow! optimized). You're the first one I see claim the opposite.

Quake III has no SSE optimizations in the source code, but the video drivers often get those optimizations. More optimizations in the source code would really improve performance.

[email_atif]

Wassup SharkyForum Readers,

I just wanted to thank you for putting up this excellent post, I think we all appreciate your work. However, as Humus pointed out, I've always heard/read that Quake III has Intel Pentium III SSE Optimizations in its native code. I'm not going to argue about this with you, I'll call id here in about a minute, and I'll post again as a follow up. Thanks for the information though.

Late

[Arcadian]

Originally posted by FaTs:
I read the review on sharky about the 1.3ghz P4 i was disaponited that they didn't take it out and place it in another m/b and see if it o/c'd . If that chip could reach 1.8ghz it would be a decent buy. Expsensive but bloody fast.

Who says such a review wouldn't be in, say, the near future?

[Arcadian]

Originally posted by email_atif:
Wassup SharkyForum Readers,

I just wanted to thank you for putting up this excellent post, I think we all appreciate your work. However, as Humus pointed out, I've always heard/read that Quake III has Intel Pentium III SSE Optimizations in its native code. I'm not going to argue about this with you, I'll call id here in about a minute, and I'll post again as a follow up. Thanks for the information though.

Late

Well, I can't back this up 100% myself, but on another board, someone apparently used a program that searches for SSE instructions, and they found that the Quake III binaries had no such optimizations at all. The video drivers, on the other hand, which Quake III references quite often for drawing the scene, are usually heavily optimized.

[Arcadian]

Originally posted by Bateluer:
Will the P4 have a SMP compatible chipset when Northwood is released? The Hammer line is supposed to, and the 760MP(770?) chipset for the athlon is supposed to be coming real soon.
Dual athlons would rock, and likely by half the cost of a single P4 to boot.

I believe that only the Pentium 4 Xeons will be SMP capable, and they are set to launch in Q2, around the same time as the SMP Athlon motherboards.

The Xeons will be used on the i860 (code named Colusa), which is RDRAM based, and I believe I read somewhere that there will be a DDR based chipset in Q4 code named Placer.

Keep in mind that Pentium 4 Xeons will only cost $100 or so more than the regular Pentium 4 Processors, and they may have multi-threading in them (if rumors are true). This could mean you can buy one processor, and get the performance of two. I wonder if the price would then compare with the Athlon.... (Oh, when will Q2 get here)