Encoding Performance

For our encoding performance tests, we used AutoGK 1.96 with both the DivX and Xvid codecs. We encoded chapter 9 from The Sum of All Fears without audio to 75% quality. This results in a file size about 1/3 as large as the original (not counting the audio size). As a more common encoding task, we also encode a Budweiser commercial from 30 MB down to 5 MB, including audio encoding. This results in three encoding passes: the compression test, a first pass, and the final pass. We take the total number of frames in the video (900) and divide it by the time taken, reporting the resulting frames per second. In all AutoGK benchmarks, higher scores will be better.

The performance difference between the slowest and fastest setup is around 50% for every encoding task. AutoGK runs a lot more of the computations within the CPU and doesn't depend much on user input. If you were to take a two-hour movie, the difference between 53 minutes and 79 minutes encoding is very noticeable. Using three passes, a two-hour movie would take around 250 minutes compared to 375 minutes - and all of those results are using the slightly faster DivX codec!

Comparing the value RAM and the performance RAM, the largest gap is at 2.7 GHz, and it's once again 5%. Also of interest is that the 10x270 PC2700 part outperformed the 10x280 PC3200 2T part - although dropping to 1T and PC2700 at 2.8 GHz would have improved performance, it seemed less stable than at PC3200 3-4-4-8-2T. Our CPU was definitely hitting its limit above 2.70 GHz.

Application Performance Synthetic Gaming Performance
Comments Locked

101 Comments

View All Comments

  • Powered by AMD - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    Do not forget The Athlon XP 1700+ 1.5Volts, DLT3C, mines is OC from 1467 Stock to 2250 Mhz and pretty cool with an old Thermaltake Blower...
    It can ever reach 2450 Mhz but with 1.8 Volts.
    hey, at 2250 Mhz its a 53% OC too!!
    Great article but it will be useful for me only when I need an Athlon 64 :p
  • donkeycrock - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    i noticed that frys is selling x-connect (500 Watts)psu for 25 dollars after rebate. it is extremely heavy, and not many reviews say if they are very good PSU's for overclocking, anybody have knowladge about this PSU.

    thanks
    brad
  • cryptonomicon - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    nice article jarred, and you worded the disclaimers perfectly, bravo.

    and its nice to see those ram comparisons. good to see those results on the latest a64 platform and confirm once again that the ram makes only a few percentage points difference, if that. shelling out all your dough on a good GPU, then buying the lowest model venice, a DFI board, and value ram is the way to go.
  • Googer - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    http://www2.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/Down...">AMD Thermal Grease List PDF
  • RupertS - Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - link

    Interesting, AMD only recommends thermal grease for short term use 'where the heat sink is removed and attached multiple times over a short period'. They definitely do not recommend it for long term use.
  • StriderGT - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    Both me, Zebo and many others have clarified long time ago in Anands forum the pointless struggle of purchasing extreme memory parts in Athlon64. Dividers and value ram will do the trick of excellent ocing giving you 95%++ of the performance someone gets with expensive and overvolted ram modules. Nice seeing anandtech come up with an article backing up the threads like this one (http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid...">http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...mp;threa...

    PS For those owning MSI Neo3 m/bs -and even the rest- I have created back then an excel calculating the actual memory frequency with the various BIOS settings. Enjoy
    http://www.geocities.com/gtstrider/">http://www.geocities.com/gtstrider/
  • JarredWalton - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    Yeah, I've seen quite a few threads around the 'net on this, but AT hadn't covered it very well, and I hoped to get something "official" out there. (None of the enthusiast sites have really covered this that well, as far as I could see.) Since I've been fooling around with various AMD CPU overclocks for a year now, I figured others might like to see the possibilities. High-end, high-cost is well and good for dreams, but like most people I live a bit closer to reality. $200 is about as much as I'm willing to pay for a CPU in most cases.
  • andyc - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    So you can basically overclock the 3000 to the same speeds the 3200 can? So it's not even worth it to go with the 3200?
  • JarredWalton - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    Well, perhaps. 9x300 requires a better motherboard than 10x270, though most boards than can handle 270 MHz CPU bus speeds will also handle 300 I think. For value overclockers, though, I don't think I'd bother spending the extra $50 on the 3200+, no. Spend it on the GPU instead (if you play games).
  • Mogadon - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    Great article Jarred, thanks for putting in all the hard work and time.

    I have one question regarding voltages. As I understand it, you wouldn't recommend running a VCore above 1.65V for a long term overclock. I understand the warnings and possible effects on the CPU with running a high VCore but I wanted to know if this is around the VCore that you would run on, say, your overclocked system?

    The majority of people on the forums here don't really recommend going above 1.55V or 1.6V, i was wondering if you had any comments about this.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now