Audio Encoding Performance
While the media encoding prowess of the Intel platform seemed to be lacking at times, we expect it to fair a little better on the audio side. Our audio test suite normally consists of Exact Audio Copy v095.b4 and LAME 3.98a3. We did run these tests with basically the same results but for our purposes today we will utilize iTunes 7.1 as it is one of the most utilized audio applications available due to the immense popularity of the iPod.
Our first task was to figure out what test CD to utilize. We needed one that contained a significant number of tracks and had over 600MB of data in order to properly stress our platforms. After rummaging around the lab and discounting the Burl Ives Greatest Christmas Hits album, we happened upon a CD that would work for our purposes as it was not working for anyone else, INXS Greatest Hits. This one time '80s glory masterpiece contains 16 tracks totaling 606MB of songs that was instantly whisked into our anxiously awaiting optical drive.
Our first test consists of utilizing iTunes to rip our INXS CD to WAV format on our hard drive. Even though CPU speed and optical drive selection have a great impact on these test results we are using the same optical drive between platforms for each test.
Our two AM2 platforms score slightly ahead of our Intel setup but the margin is minimal. This test was very consistent with each result never varying more than one second from the base score. Unlike the Nero Recode 2 DVD burning test, in this case our AMD systems did not suffer from drive issues.
Our next two tests have us utilizing iTunes to convert our WAV files into ACC or MP3 compatible formats. We utilize the 320kbps setting for both tests with the MP3 test also utilizing the variable bit rate option.
We usually see iTunes favoring the AM2 platforms in most test results. The results are no different here with both AM2 systems completing the ACC conversion about 50 seconds before the Intel system. In our MP3 conversion, the Intel system places second but the general differences are minimal. We attribute the 6150 performance to better storage controller and CPU throughput although standard memory bandwidth is lower than the other two boards.
Our final test has us creating a legal use copy CD from the base WAV files we collected when ripping the INXS Greatest Hits CD. Not that the world needs anymore of these CDs but it makes for a good closing test. We promise all CDs are destroyed after testing (much to the pleasure of our ears and those at the RIAA).
Once again our test results are extremely close with the optical drive playing a leading role in ensuring our results are fairly close. The minor differences are all attributable to the better disk performance of the NIVIDA 6150/430 combination in this case. We noticed each time that the disk access stopped about two to three seconds quicker with the 6150 platform. This is opposite of our Video Encoding results where each of our AM2 platforms could not keep the optical drive fed properly over the course of a burn session.
While the media encoding prowess of the Intel platform seemed to be lacking at times, we expect it to fair a little better on the audio side. Our audio test suite normally consists of Exact Audio Copy v095.b4 and LAME 3.98a3. We did run these tests with basically the same results but for our purposes today we will utilize iTunes 7.1 as it is one of the most utilized audio applications available due to the immense popularity of the iPod.
Our first task was to figure out what test CD to utilize. We needed one that contained a significant number of tracks and had over 600MB of data in order to properly stress our platforms. After rummaging around the lab and discounting the Burl Ives Greatest Christmas Hits album, we happened upon a CD that would work for our purposes as it was not working for anyone else, INXS Greatest Hits. This one time '80s glory masterpiece contains 16 tracks totaling 606MB of songs that was instantly whisked into our anxiously awaiting optical drive.
Our first test consists of utilizing iTunes to rip our INXS CD to WAV format on our hard drive. Even though CPU speed and optical drive selection have a great impact on these test results we are using the same optical drive between platforms for each test.
Our two AM2 platforms score slightly ahead of our Intel setup but the margin is minimal. This test was very consistent with each result never varying more than one second from the base score. Unlike the Nero Recode 2 DVD burning test, in this case our AMD systems did not suffer from drive issues.
Our next two tests have us utilizing iTunes to convert our WAV files into ACC or MP3 compatible formats. We utilize the 320kbps setting for both tests with the MP3 test also utilizing the variable bit rate option.
We usually see iTunes favoring the AM2 platforms in most test results. The results are no different here with both AM2 systems completing the ACC conversion about 50 seconds before the Intel system. In our MP3 conversion, the Intel system places second but the general differences are minimal. We attribute the 6150 performance to better storage controller and CPU throughput although standard memory bandwidth is lower than the other two boards.
Our final test has us creating a legal use copy CD from the base WAV files we collected when ripping the INXS Greatest Hits CD. Not that the world needs anymore of these CDs but it makes for a good closing test. We promise all CDs are destroyed after testing (much to the pleasure of our ears and those at the RIAA).
Once again our test results are extremely close with the optical drive playing a leading role in ensuring our results are fairly close. The minor differences are all attributable to the better disk performance of the NIVIDA 6150/430 combination in this case. We noticed each time that the disk access stopped about two to three seconds quicker with the 6150 platform. This is opposite of our Video Encoding results where each of our AM2 platforms could not keep the optical drive fed properly over the course of a burn session.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
70 Comments
View All Comments
Gary Key - Wednesday, March 7, 2007 - link
The board will not do 1080P over the HDMI port at this time. 720P is working fine. The mATX will be up on the 19th, provided my heart is still working by that time, have to say that testing under Vista is not a pleasant experience. ;)dmce - Friday, March 9, 2007 - link
Gary, thanks for the info. Is the lack of ability to do 1080p related to Vista or will it just not do it at this stage. Is it likely bios/driver updates will improve this?chucky2 - Thursday, March 8, 2007 - link
Man, to me it sounds like - other than having video and audio in one cable - HDMI is not the way to go.Better to have DVI w/ HDCP it sounds like...plus, the connector is more beefcake, no falling out accidentally with DVI.
Chuck
Gary Key - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
The platform will no do 1080P playback at this time in a consistent matter. As stated, we normally would end up with a slide show or a blank screen. AMD has told us 1080P will be possible with a driver update, proper playback support (PowerDVD or WinDVD), and a processor along the lines of a 5200+. We received a new driver update to address video quality issues we found late in testing but 1080P was not addressed yet. I am just as anxious as everyone else to see if it will do 1080P. ;)savantu - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
This has to be one of the worst review ever done at Anandtech , almost makes you think somebody was paid to do it this bad.we fully believe the majority of the performance difference lies in the chipset selection.
Is this a joke or what ? The 2.6GHz 5200+ against a 1.86GHz Core 2 in media encoding and you think it is the chipset?! Every other test you made put the E6300 in between the 3800+ and 4200+.
goinginstyle - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
Have you ever run a Conroe on a VIA or 945P chipset, if you have then you know what was meant by his statement.JarredWalton - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
Try reading it in context:Nero Recode 2 performance:
AnyDVD Rip = 3-way tie more or less
Shrink = 6150 leads, G965 second, 690G last (despite 6150 and 690G using the same CPU)
Shrink/Burn = G965 first, 6150 and 690G virtually tied.
Full quote, instead of your selected text: "Of course, we are using a mid-range AM2 processor against the budget C2D part (the AMD price cuts have helped matters there, as the price difference is currently only about $35) but we fully believe the majority of the performance difference lies in the chipset selection. It is only in the shrink and burn tests that we see the Intel platform flexing its muscles...."
In other words, the difference we saw in the Shrink test indicates that the 6150 chipset is better for this task than 690G. We definitely know that the Core 2 Duo is faster at equivalent CPU prices than X2 chips, but we're looking at platforms and chipsets and not just CPUs.
UserNO - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
Gawd, people, if you're going to tell us that we'll "have to play at 800x600" if we use these integrated graphics, why not test the games at 800x600 and report framerates? Find the highest (lowest) settings necessary to get a playable experience and tell us that. No one's going to run a game at 1024x768, get 15fps, and then give up; they're going to crank the settings and res down until they can play the game.It's not enough to just say "integrated graphics are unsuitable for even casual gamers, buy a discrete card" and then not quantify the difference.
Gary Key - Tuesday, March 6, 2007 - link
We tested the games at 800x600 and the results will be in our mATX roundup along with dedicated video scores.In the meantime-
800x600- HQ settings
690G 6150 G965
BF2 20.68 17.4 DNF
HL2 35.7 28.8 5.3
CoH 26.4 21.7 24.9
Calin - Wednesday, March 7, 2007 - link
I just wanted to say I'm looking forward to the mATX roundupNice article overall, thanks. And you might want to invest in some cheap Intel and AMD processors (the low-end, for $100 both), just to be able to compare them (I'm not suggesting complete testings on every processor possible)