BIOSTAR K8VHA Pro VIA K8T800 Mainboard Review (4)

	<![if lt IE 4]> <SCRIPT SRC="http://imgserv.adbutler.com/adserve/;ID=131075;size=468x60;setID=61435;type=js" LANGUAGE="JAVASCRIPT"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT> <a href="http://imgserv.adbutler.com/go2/;ID=131075;size=468x60;setID=61435"> <img src="http://imgserv.adbutler.com/adserve.ibs/;ID=131075;size=468x60;setID=61435;type=img" border="0" height="60" width="468"></a> </NOSCRIPT><![endif]>
中文版 \| News \| Archives \| Reviews \| Forum \| $ Deals \| Links \| History \| Contact \| Privacy

BIOSTAR K8VHA Pro VIA K8T800 Mainboard Review (4)
Overclocker 6 Oct 2003

Benchmarking

We check out the results for ZD Benchmarks using CC Winstone 2002 and Business Winstone 2001 in this section of the benchmark tests.

On The K7 series of boards, SiS boards always seem to have better throughput when it comes to disk access and this resulted in better overall performance in CCWS and BWS.

In CCWS 2002, we see that BIOSTAR K8VHA Pro scores 45.2 & Gigabyte K8VNXP scores 46.2 which is slower than the ALi ref board of 51.3 and the nF3 board score of 50.8. ALi and NF3 leads by around 10%.

On Business Winstone 2001, the Gigabyte K8VNXP again lost to both the Gigabyte K8NNXP and ALi ref board. In fact, the SiS 748 boards equipped with a AMD AXP3200+ performs better in this test. The P4 3.0G performs the worst among all. ALi : 87.3, NF3 : 86.1, VIA : 82.6. The difference is around 5% from the fastest. From the looks of it, the VIA 8237 South Bridge did not seem to help in speeding up IDE access.

Next >>>