Asus A7N266-C in the test: The nForce 415-D now also without graphics
- 1 Preface
- The chipset in detail
- 2 Graphics included
- 3 MCP, MCP-D?
- 4 Scope of delivery and documentation
- 5 Features
- 6 Stability
- 7 Test system
- 12 Conclusion A7N266-C
As always ever should also be in this Em Review SiSoft Sandra 2001 again form the entry into our benchmark course. The Asus A7A266-E recently proved that the pure streaming performance shown here does not always necessarily have to represent the later performance graduation. Sandra ignores the latency times, which are extremely influential in many applications.
Two thoughts shot through our heads while looking at the results. On the one hand, admiration that the nForce 415-D was the first chipset on our course to break the 1GB/s FPU mark. On the other hand, the 'extremely bad' FPU value of the 8KHA +. The value achieved for systems with SiS735 or KT266 is still an unattainable hurdle. The results of 971MB/s we achieved in the review of the 8KHA + were, however, far undercut.Even after a BIOS downgrade to the revision used at the time, there was no improvement. On the contrary, the values continued to decline. The solution of the problem? The Athlon XP! Its integrated 'data prefetch' seems to lead to unrepresentative results on the 8KHA + in Sandra, which the later benchmark process will show.
Out of pure interest, we then gave the A7N266-C another RAM module. The aim was to find out how the step backwards would affect the 64-bit bus. Halving the memory shouldn't play a role in Sandra. Lo and behold: with 5% in the ALU and 6% in the FPU rating, the TwinBank company takes the lead. However, it should finally become clear that not too much remains of the theoretically twice as large bandwidth with the current infrastructure.
The packer WinACE already had the one or Another surprise brought us and so this time we were excited about the first practical result. In addition to the pure streaming capability, short latency times are particularly important here. We chose around 360MB bitmaps, documents and already compressed MP3s as the 'packing template'.
8:37 or 8:36? WinACE didn't really want to make a decision on the A7N266-C. On the EPoX 8KHA +, however, the time remained constant at 8:37. However, with a total runtime of 517 seconds, one second falls within the influence of the measurement inaccuracy. What remains is the conclusion that the nForce 415-D and KT266A don't take much action in WinACE and the assumption that the hard disk played a decisive factor in this discipline ...
The KT266A can relieve the nForce of a good five seconds or 7% and thus speaks clearly against the results shown in Sandra and in favor of our assumption that the XP there the results has falsified. A more than clear result.
Another premiere is Cinebench 2000. This rather compact benchmark is based on the ray tracing program Cinema 4D and gives a good overview of the rendering - Properties of the CPU chipset memory subsystem.
Here, too, the differences between the two boards mainly amount to the decimal places. The only significant gap was in the shadow calculation with the help of the OpenGL interface, in the shading. Here the nForce is around 1% ahead of the KT266A. However, this does not seem to be really earth-shattering.
On the next page: Quake3Arena