Athlon 64 X2 4200+

Core Clock: 2.2 GHz per core

L2 Cache size: 512 kB per core

Socket Type: 939 pin

Test bed Motherboard: A8N32 SLI Deluxe

Other Features: Hyper Transport bus, 54-bit extensions, 3D Now! Professional, SSE 3, Cool and Quiet Technology

Foresight is a very important factor in today's CPU wars. Without foresight, a lot could go wrong that even the best of marketing can not repair. Intel is a perfect example of such a situation. At the start of the century, Intel stated that an increase in speed only meant an increase in "megahertz", while AMD stated otherwise. Four years down the road, Intel had to change its naming scheme in order to accommodate its clock cycle bottleneck. In a similar manner, the AMD K8 design was built from the ground up, taking into consideration multicore scenarios, while the Intel variants were designed for single core implementation. Today, it can be seen that AMD's dual core variants are far more elegantly designed than Intel's slap jobs.

The elegance of AMD's design stems from its self proclaimed "Direct Connect Architecture" which allows the two cores to work at peak efficiency while maintaining low overheads. For its dual core implementation, two features are of significant importance. The first is the System Request Queue, which allocates system resources to each core, ensuring that the bus is used as efficiently as possible. The System Request Queue is directly connected to the second feature of the DCA which is the Crossbar. The Crossbar is the link between the two cores and the HyperTransport bus, and is the main pathway for all input/output (110) operations. The Crossbar allows information to seep through one core at a time. When linked with the priority driven System Request Queue, it enables a highly efficient process to take place. Intel's dual core offering dumps its entire workload on the limited 800 megahertz front side bus (FSB), which makes intercore communication a very painful process. While AMD's architecture  allows the two cores to "'talk”‘ to each other via the System Request Queue feature, processes on the Intel chipset have to route their way around the already choked FSB to get from one core to another.

Given the relatively high speed of the L 1 and L2 caches, such transfer lag leads to inefficient use of the cores in the Intel offering. In order to better understand the repercussions of such a design flaw, Hard Talk decided to also test Intel's offering, thus allowing a better real world comparison for readers. It should be noted that the AMD processor tests were done on an A8N32 SLI motherboard with two gigabytes of RAM alongside a single GeForce 6800 GT video card. For the Intel tests, the motherboard of choice was the PSLD2 Deluxe.

Compression Test The first test involved running a compression algorithm in the background while a 40-minute DVD quality video ran in the foreground. Such a scenario presents a typical power user's usage pattern. The file being compressed is a one gigabyte data file that is compressed using WinRAR with settings set at "maximum compression". The difference between the Athlon 64 X2 4200+ and the previously reviewed Pentium D 830 is just of a few seconds. The reason behind this is twofold. First of all, the Pentium series have always had an edge in media encoding and decoding operations. Secondly, the processes involved do not tax the bandwidth or the resources. In the end, if desktop functionality is the name of the game, the performance difference is not worth the extra moola one pays for the Athlon 64 X2.

Game Test 1:
Doom 3
Doom 3 is one of Hard Talk's favourite tests. This is primarily because it can entirely suck up a video card's resources and is essentially taxing on nearly every system resource available. Running it alongside the WinRAR compression test makes it a heavy-duty benchmark that can essentially bring any system to its knees.

The Athlon 64 X2 4200+ eats the Pentium D 830 for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Historically, the Athlon 64s have always been better in gaming scenarios than the Pentium line up and the Athlon 64 X2 4200+ lives up to this promise with a home run. A performance difference of nearly 30 frames per second (fps) is something that cannot be ignored. The marked difference during heavy multitasking situations points towards superior architecture. The Pentium D 830 has a three gigahertz core speed thus has an 800 megahertz lead over the 4200+, which makes this slip even more embarrassing for Intel.

Game Test 2:
Splinter Cell - Chaos Theory In order to ensure that the Doom 3 test is not the only one tipping the scale in favour of AMD, Hard Talk conducted another "minimum fps" test with Splinter Cell 3: Chaos Theory. Minimum fps suggests how well the system can hold its own under the most stressful of situations. Simply put, if the game becomes unplayable in certain sections then there is no real reason to spend money to upgrade. With the Pentium D 830, the game became a bit  jerky at 26 fps, while the Athlon 64 X2 4200+ held its own at a steady minimum of 50 fps. From the looks of it, .this is another sweeping victory for AMD. Conclusion

If desktop work is what you primarily do with your computer, there is no special need to go for tile Athlon 64 X2 4200+ over the cheaper Pentium D 830. By virtue of it being cheaper, the Intel offering is an all-out winner when it comes to pricing.

But if you are a hardcore gamer or a power user, the AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ is the only way to go. AMD has again proved that it is a pioneer in processor design, and for all it's worth, a very serious contender to Intel's dominant position in the market.

_{source Spider Mag.}