Motherboard Guide

ASUS M2N32-SLI Deluxe/Wireless Edition (NVIDIA nForce 590 SLI) review

Sneak Peek: Core 2 Extreme X6900 and Athlon 64 FX-64 Performance Preview

Compare This



Application Benchmarks

SYSmark 2004 and Cinebench 2003

The 3GHz Athlon 64 FX-64 is straight up 5% faster than the 2.8GHz FX-62 in SYSmark 2004, but when you compare that with the Intel Core 2, it is still another 5% below the performance of the Core 2 Duo E6600 on overall. The Core 2 Extreme X6900 on the other hand sets another record for the Internet Content Creation workload. However, you might have noticed that it has a lower Office Productivity score than the X6800, which is probably due to the overclocking. When Intel eventually launches the Core 2 Extreme X6900, we'll be more able to verify this anomaly.

In Cinebench 2003, the FX-64 is able to overtake the Core 2 Duo E6600 by around 3% in terms of multi-threaded rendering performance, but still has a ways to catch up to the E6700 and once we look at the Intel Core 2 Extremes, even the 3GHz FX-64 is still around 19% slower than the 2.93GHz X6800 and almost 30% under the X6900. And just like in SYSmark 2004, the projected speed of the Core 2 Extreme X6900 broke new grounds in Cinebench 2003 as it broke the 1K score barrier.