AMD Athlon 64 3400+ Review January 05, 2004 Chris Crazipper Angelini

Introduction

Page:: ( 1 / 15 )

When the Athlon 64 FX-51 debuted on September 23 of 2003, we were blown away by its performance. Even Intel’s Pentium 4 3.2GHz Extreme Edition succumbed to the FX’s gaming alacrity. At the same time, it was tough to find and almost prohibitively expensive. And while Intel’s Extreme Edition is still the priciest processor out there at $900+ dollars, the $750 dollar Athlon 64 FX-51 is still incredibly steep.

Until now, AMD’s Athlon 64 3200+ was the only alternative for gamers looking to benefit from an integrated memory controller and 1MB of L2 cache (plus the promise of 64-bit compliance whenever that becomes a necessity). Running at 2GHz and equipped with a single-channel memory controller, it lags behind the more robust Athlon 64 FX-51; however, the Athlon 64 3200+ also costs $300 dollars less, making it a much more palpable upgrade for the future-conscious consumer.

Then the Athlon 64 3000+ silently emerged, running just as fast but with half the L2 cache, for a total of 512KB. It’s faster than the Athlon XP 3200+ and costs just over $200, too. So, with two respectable Athlon 64 products under its belt, AMD is now prepared to step it up a notch and address the enthusiasts looking for more horsepower at a reasonable price.

Inside the Athlon 64 3400+

There isn’t much to say about the Athlon 64 3400+ in terms of new features. It isn’t related to the “Newcastle” core, on which the 3000+ purportedly centers. Rather, the 3400+ is identical to the 3200+ before it, sporting 105.9 million transistors, and measuring 193 square millimeters. The core contains 128KB of L1 cache divided into 64KB each of data and instruction storage, along with 1MB of exclusive L2 cache (that is, data stored in L1 does not need to be duplicated in L2).

[image]

More 3400+ and Value

Page:: ( 2 / 15 )

More 3400+

The new Athlon 64 3400+ runs at 2.2GHz, the same speed as AMD’s current flagship Athlon 64 FX-51. Given the latter’s advantages we wouldn’t expect the former to one-up the FX. However, applications that don’t rely on memory performance may paint the two processors in a very similar light given their clock speed parity.

This, in turn, sets up a very interesting comparison between the Athlon 64 3400+ and Athlon 64 FX-51. On one hand, the Socket 754 interface will persist for quite a while; AMD’s roadmap is neatly laid out until 2005 with a 90nm SOI core called Winchester carrying the Athlon 64 load. There is also speculation about a Socket 754 variant of the Athlon XP armed with 256KB of cache and an integrated memory controller. The upgrade path for anyone looking to buy a Socket 754 path is somewhat more secure than the future of Socket 940.

[image]

Value

Where, then, does the Athlon 64 3400+ rank on our value scale? Considering its pedigree, the 3400+ is actually priced very competitively. AMD has the chip pegged at $417 in 1,000 unit quantities, but it will undoubtedly surface for less than that online. Intel’s 3.2GHz Pentium 4 costs about $400, and the Athlon 64 FX-51 is still at about $750. Relatively speaking, an Athlon 64 3400+ priced just above $400 dollars is very compelling if it can get to within five or 10 percent of the current FX’s performance. Plus, when you consider that a Socket 754 motherboard costs almost $100 dollars less than a comparably equipped Socket 940 board and a gigabyte of registered DDR400 carries roughly a $50 price premium, AMD’s latest release looks even better.



SIDEBAR: Not only is Toledo the core designation for AMD’s upcoming Athlon 64 FX replacement, but it is also a university in Ohio and the last name of UCLA’s former football coach who led the school through a few mediocre seasons.

System Setup

Page:: ( 3 / 15 )

System Setup

AMD Athlon 64 3400+
AMD Athlon 64 3200+
AMD Athlon 64 FX-51
Intel Pentium 4 3.2GHz (HT enabled)

Gigabyte K8VNXP Socket 754 K8T800 Motherboard
ASUS SK8V Socket 940 K8T800 Motherboard
ABIT IC7-MAX3 Socket 478 875P Motherboard

1GB Mushkin Registered ECC 2-3-2 PC3200 DDR Memory (2x512MB)
1GB Corsair Pro Series 3-4-4 PC4000 DDR Memory (2x512MB)

ATI RADEON 9800 XT 256MB
Catalyst 3.10

34GB Western Digital Raptor (10,000RPM, 8MB cache)

Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 1

DirectX 9.0b

Desktop resolution 1024x768, 32-bit color, 85Hz refresh

All power saving options were turned off, as were the Automatic Update and System Restore services. Graphics options under the ‘Performance’ tab were all disabled for maximum performance.

Benchmarks

BAPCo SysMark 2004
PC Magazine Business Winstone 2004
PC Magazine Content Creation Winstone 2004
SiSoft Sandra 2004
Futuremark 3D Mark03 v.340
Novalogic Comanche 4
Enlight X2: The Threat Rolling Demo
Square Enix Final Fantasy XI Benchmark 2
Epic Unreal Tournament 2003 Demo
Ubisoft IL2 Sturmovik: Forgotten Battles

Lab Notes

You’ll notice that we are using two different sets of memory modules. The registered Mushkin modules are used exclusively on the Athlon 64 FX-51 system, while the Corsair Pro Series modules correspond to the Athlon 64 and Pentium 4 test rigs. Each motherboard used for testing was upgraded with the latest publicly available BIOS, meaning the SK8V didn’t need an upgrade.

Also, keep in mind that by transitioning to Content Creation 2004 and SysMark 2004, it is no longer necessary to update Windows Media Encoder with any patch, as AMD’s multimedia instruction sets are properly recognized and utilized.

Finally, it should be noted that the Athlon 64 3400+ has a locked clock multiplier, just like the 3200+ and 3000+ processors. The only chip in AMD’s lineup without that restriction is the Athlon 64 FX, which, given its price and exclusivity, isn’t a prime target for dishonest retailers involved in remarking their products. Further, the current crop of Athlon 64-compliant core logic employs coupled buses, so overclocking the system bus affects all of the components attached to it. Our overclocking attempts with a locked Athlon 64 FX and an Athlon 64 3200+ have yielded negligible results, to say the least. If you’re looking for a capable platform for overclocking, look either to the Athlon6 4 FX or wait for the successor to VIA K8T800, which is expected to employ decoupled bus speeds.



SIDEBAR: Not only is Paris the core designation for AMD’s upcoming Athlon XP replacement, but it’s also…wait, if you’ve never heard of Paris, please send an email to me, letting me know which anti-spam program you use. Thanks!

SysMark 2004

Page:: ( 4 / 15 )

BAPCo SysMark 2004

Notes

BAPCO’s SysMark 2002 was previously ostracized by benchmarking labs for showing a suspiciously large bias towards Intel processors. Then, AMD joined the organization, lending its input to development. The result is SysMark 2004, freshly released and designed to measure overall system responsiveness rather than time taken to complete a workload. It’s a massive test, consuming more than three hours per run. However, its results are much more inline with what we’d expect given an application of its nature.

It isn’t much of a surprise that the Athlon 64 FX-51 takes a first place finish. After all, it has plenty of memory bandwidth at its disposal. Intel’s Pentium 4 3.2 comes in a close second place, though, due in part to excellent Web Publication and 3D Creation scores. The Athlon 64 3400+ in question does very well in its own regard, coming in just three percent behind the first place finisher.


SIDEBAR: BAPCo’s SysMark 2004 seems much more dependable now that AMD is part of the organization. Interestingly enough, ATI also joined up, while NVIDIA hasn’t. Guess we won’t be using SysMark 2004 as a graphics card benchmark!

Business Winstone 2004

Page:: ( 5 / 15 )

PC Magazine Business Winstone 2004

Notes

Business Winstone 2004 uses many of the same applications as SysMark 2004, but it runs through them as fast as possible rather than in real-time to determine the amount of time needed for task completion.

Once again, the Athlon 64 FX-51 takes first place. This time, though, the Athlon 64 3400+ places second and is followed by the 3000+. Intel’s 3.2GHz Pentium 4 doesn’t fare as well, likely as a result of the chip’s 20-stage pipeline and historically poor performance in applications heavily reliant on integer code.


SIDEBAR: If you like the prospect of the upcoming Opteron 100 series, code-named Venus, you should really check out the 80’s Bananarama hit by the same name.

Content Creation Winstone 2004

Page:: ( 6 / 15 )

PC Magazine Content Creation Winstone 2004

Notes

If you only recognize one pattern in the benchmarks, it will probably by the Athlon 64 FX’s dominance. At $700+ it isn’t really a relevant contender to its cheaper competitors, but it is very much interesting to compare its performance to the comparably clocked Athlon 64 3400+. In Content Creation 2004, the FX is only about two percent faster, despite its massive memory bandwidth advantage. The 3.2GHz Pentium 4 takes third place and is trailed by the Athlon 64 3200+.


SIDEBAR: In case you aren’t familiar with Palemo, it’s the 90nm Athlon XP replacement set to debut in the second half of 2005. Also, Palemo is a Japanese casual wear retailer.

SiSoft Sandra 2004

Page:: ( 7 / 15 )

SiSoft Sandra 2004

Notes

It’s hard to interpret the results from Sandra 2004. All indications are that the Pentium 4 should be sweeping our benchmarks, but that simply isn’t the case. The only metric won by an AMD processor is the memory bandwidth test, which shows the Athlon 64 FX as victor.


SIDEBAR: One of AMD’s foci is mobile computing, indicated by its roadmap. Oakville is the core designation for one of its 90nm designs that is expected to be available in the first half of 2005. It’s also a town in Canada between Toronto and Burlington.

3D Mark03

Page:: ( 8 / 15 )

Futuremark 3D Mark03 v.340

Notes

The 3D component of the 3D Mark03 test, which is run at 1024x768, demonstrates that the Athlon 64 FX and Athlon 64 3400+ are in close contention, separated by about half a percent. The processor benchmark shows a more significant different, though, with the FX leading by eight percent. Even more surprising is the Pentium 4 3.2GHz coming in last place.


SIDEBAR: Odessa is the next Mobile Athlon 64 we’ll be seeing, manufactured on a 90nm SOI process in the second half of this year. Incidentally, Odessa is also a city in Texas, home of the Jackalopes, a hockey team named for the elusive hare with antlers.

Comanche 4

Page:: ( 9 / 15 )

Novalogic Comanche 4

Notes

As a flight simulator, the Comanche 4 demo has always shown a particular sensitivity to platform performance. Previously ruled by the Pentium 4, AMD’s Athlon 64 debut ushered in a new speed record for Comanche 4, upheld here by the Athlon 64 FX and Athlon 64 processors. At 1024x768, less than one percentage point separates the FX from the Athlon 64 3400+. And once again, the 3.2GHz Pentium 4 comes in at last place.


SIDEBAR: The Newcastle core, currently represented by the Athlon 64 3000+, will be succeeded by Winchester, a 90nm SOI implementation. Winchester is also the family name of a famous rifle and shotgun manufacturer. Sarah Winchester built a 160-room Victorian mansion costing in excess of 5 million dollars.

IL2 Sturmovik: Forgotten Battles

Page:: ( 10 / 15 )

Ubisoft IL2 Sturmovik: Forgotten Battles

Notes

IL2, easily benchmarked with FRAPS and track replay, tells the same tale that we just saw with Comanche 4. Mainly, AMD’s Athlon 64 FX-51 is the premier gaming processor, followed closely by the newly released Athlon 64 3400+. Intel’s 3.2GHz Pentium 4 takes third place this time.


SIDEBAR: Trinidad is the core designation for AMD’s mobile Athlon XP replacement set to debut in the second half of 2005. It’s also an island in the Caribbean, a town in Colorado, and a city in California.

X2: The Threat

Page:: ( 11 / 15 )

Enlight X2: The Threat Rolling Demo

Notes

Even though X2 is another simulator, it doesn’t show a huge difference between the various platforms at 800x600. The Athlon 64 FX nevertheless scores a first place finish with the Athlon 64 3400+ coming in right behind it.


SIDEBAR: As an Audi owner, I have to appreciate S3’s naming convention for its DeltaChrome family. Both companies feature a flagship named S8, too.

Final Fantasy XI

Page:: ( 12 / 15 )

Square Enix Final Fantasy XI Benchmark 2

Notes

For some reason, the Athlon 64 FX-51 just didn’t do well in the Final Fantasy test. We formatted our test machine, reinstalled its drivers, and still couldn’t get the platform to do any better. With AMD’s FX out of the running, the Athlon 64 3400+ took a first place finish here.


SIDEBAR: Speaking of Audi, it just announced its W12-powered A8 along with the awaited S4 cabriolet. I can’t get used to the new B6 chassis though, so it’s B5 all the way.

Unreal Tournament 2003

Page:: ( 13 / 15 )

Epic Unreal Tournament 2003 Demo

Notes

The Athlon 64 FX reasserts is supremacy one last time in Unreal Tournament 2003, followed by the Athlon 64 3400+, Athlon 64 3200+, and finally, 3.2GHz Pentium 4.


SIDEBAR: With so many nice Audis on the market, it’s hard to imagine paying nearly $80 thousand dollars for Volkswagen’s new Phaeton, even if it does have a cool name.

Ballistics Report

Page:: ( 14 / 15 )

Pros:

Performance: After seemingly relaxing the performance characteristics of its rating scheme, AMD is back in the saddle with a processor truly deserving of its designation, just like its predecessor. Short of an Athlon 64 FX or Pentium 4 Extreme Edition, the 3400+ is the fastest chip you can buy. Certainly, it’s the most reasonably priced.

Platform Characteristics: Price aside, the most aggravating idea in considering an Athlon 64 FX is the constraints imposed by its supporting platform. Compatible motherboards run at least $200, and in many cases, aren’t even better than their Socket 754 counterparts. Registered memory is also more expensive. When you buy an Athlon 64 3400+, though, you have plenty of affordable motherboards from which to choose. Additionally, you can buy individual modules of quality DDR400 without worrying about matched pairs or registered modules.

Upgrade Path: With support for the Socket 940 interface teetering on the brink of uncertainty, it’s nice to know that there will be Socket 754 chips around for a while still. Representatives from AMD have publicly stated that there will be performance-mainstream options through 2004. Everything after that is still fairly hazy – it might turn out that the Socket 754 interface supports more value-oriented products, while Socket 939 hosts the performance chips. We’ll just have to wait and see.

Cons:

Price: Whenever we look at a new, high-end product, price always seems to land at the top of our complaints list. That’s the nature of bleeding edge hardware, after all. The Athlon 64 3400+’s $417 admission ticket isn’t outrageous, but it’s still higher than my car payment, which means it needs to fit within a budget. If online retailers are able to get this one in the $300+ range, it will be a much easier pill for many to swallow.

We can’t really ding the Athlon 3400+ for anything else. Sure, it’d be nice if the chip were a more willing overclocker, and a plethora of 64-bit software would be a definite plus, but they aren’t flaws. Once Microsoft addresses its security issues with Windows XP, we certainly hope it will get back on track with its 64-bit implementation.


SIDEBAR: And while we’re on the subject of Audi’s, has anyone seen the new Le Mans Quattro, yet? Talk about a sweet ride!

Final Verdict

Page:: ( 15 / 15 )

Let us know what you think about all this commotion.