Menu
nForce 2 and KT400 in a duel: Asus A7N8X Deluxe against EPoX 8RDA + and EP-8K9A2 +

nForce 2 and KT400 in a duel: Asus A7N8X Deluxe against EPoX 8RDA + and EP-8K9A2 +

Quake3Arena

  • Quake3Arena and programs based on this engine are considered to be the most memory-dependent games of all. In addition to the latency times, the pure bandwidth plays a decisive role, which is why Rambus usually takes the lead with its up to 4.2 GB/s. A useful tool that makes benchmarking with this software much easier is the Q3Bench . Predefined configs as well as the desired resolutions and levels of detail can be selected here. The hard-working helper also records the results.
  • Further information: guru3d.com
  • Download: G256.com

Quake3Arena

Which benchmark should the new 4in1 driver called 'Hyperion' from VIA do? Right, the Q3Bench. Unfortunately, the package didn't turn out to be a revelation in our test. The KT400 lacks 30 FPS or 10% speed compared to its competition, which once again sprints hand in hand across the finish line. However, one should also pay attention to the second result in higher resolution. Because, as so often in the past, it shows once again that in larger dimensions the graphics card becomes a limiting factor and the mainboard becomes an extra.

Comanche 4

  • Comanche 4 is a fairly new game, which makes excessive use of the pixel shaders of modern graphics cards to represent the detailed landscape, as well as the beautifully animated water and reflective surfaces. At an average of 30 fps, the polygon throughput is around 6 million per second. In our test, more than 10 million polygons per second could be displayed, which is of course due to the strong support of the graphics card by the processor.
  • Further information: Novalogic.com
  • Download: Novalogic.com

Comanche 4
    • EPoX 8RDA + (nForce 2) DDR333
      49,30
    • Asus A7N8X (nForce 2) DDR333
      49.05
    • EPoX 8K9A2 + (KT400 ) DDR333
      46.65

The fact that Comanche 4 is not slowed down by the graphics card in its frame rates despite the selected resolution of 1024x768 and 32-bit color depth is clear from the renewed lead of the nForce 2. The A7N8X and theGet 8RDA + ahead. The EPoX board is slightly in the front.

3DMark 2001SE

  • The 3DMark 2001SE is without question the most popular program for evaluating a 'gamer PC'. In a series of synthetic but very practical individual tests (partly based on the Max Payne engine), everything is demanded of the graphics card in particular. In addition to the graphics card, the focus here is on the CPU and memory and their smooth cooperation. However, the benchmark has come under more and more criticism in the last few months because it was able to prove partial measurements in favor of nVidia or other manipulations in favor of a manufacturer.
  • Further information: MadOnion.com
  • Download: ComputerBase.de

MadOnion.com 3DMark 2001
Unit: Points
    • EPoX 8RDA + ( nForce 2) DDR333
      12,793
    • Asus A7N8X (nForce 2) DDR333
      12,586
    • EPoX 8K9A2 + (KT400) DDR333
      12.423

At first glance, it seems to us here present the usual image. However, the Asus A7N8X seems to be weak here, because with a gap of 200 points on the 8RDA + and a lead of only 160 points on the 8K9A2 +, it is closer to the KT400 than to its chipset brother for the first time. The differences are not serious. But should there be a tendency here?

Unreal Tournament 2003

  • For a few days, the successor to the UT ego shooter, Unreal Tournament 2003, has also been available in Germany. In a report we had already taken on the hardware requirements of the demo and found an almost perfect environment for a CPU test. Because like UT (1), UT2003 is also strong fromProcessor and memory connection, including the FSB, dependent.
  • Further information: ComputerBase.de
  • Download: UnrealTournament2003.com (demo version)

Unreal Tournament 2003
  • FlyBy:
    • EPoX 8RDA + (nForce 2) DDR333
      161,36
    • Asus A7N8X (nForce 2) DDR333
      160.94
    • EPoX 8K9A2 + (KT400) DDR333
      160.26
  • Botmatch:
    • EPoX 8RDA + (nForce 2) DDR333
      67.29
    • Asus A7N8X (nForce 2) DDR333
      67.09
    • EPoX 8K9A2 + (KT400) DDR333
      63.90

The fourth gaming benchmark and for the fourth time in a row the 8RDA + defends its first place. Even if the A7N8X is only missing a few tenths of a frame after the faux pas in 3DMark 2001SE, it has to be content with second place. While the KT400 can still keep up in the FlyBy, which is mostly limited to graphics cards, it falls back 5% in the practical botmatch.

On the next page: Seti @ Home