Dell Dimension XPS: Gaming with all the Trimmings
by Wesley Fink on November 13, 2003 10:35 PM EST- Posted in
- Systems
Dell Dimension XPS: The Test
The full suite of benchmarks was run with the Dell Dimension XPS gaming system. Dell shipped the XPS with an ATI Radeon 9800 XT video card, which was used for all benchmarks with the Dell system. Please keep in mind that all of our comparison benchmarks were run with the ATI Radeon 9800 PRO, which is slightly slower. The 9800 PRO and XT use essentially the same GPU, but the XT is clocked a bit faster than the 9800 PRO. For a better idea of how the two cards compare, please refer to our benchmarks in AnandTech's ATI 9800 XT review.Memory timings are not adjustable on the Dimension XPS, so benchmarks on the Dell were run with the memory and setup as provided by Dell. We confirmed with CPU-Z that Dell runs the installed DDR400 memory at 3-3-3-8 timings. This compares to the 2-2-2-6 timings that we normally use with Mushkin PC3500 Level 2 or OCZ 3500 Platinum Ltd in our system reviews at DDR400.
Dell provided a complete installation on the test XPS and we made no attempt to reinstall. To provide the best test results under these circumstances, all co-resident applications and special services loading at startup were turned off so they would not load at boot. Benchmarks were installed and run from the nearly empty 500GB SATA RAID array. AnandTech benchmarks are normally run with sound disabled to remove the influence of varying overhead depending on the sound chip used on the board or video card. We, therefore, disabled all on-board sound on the Dell Dimension XPS to provide the most comparable benchmarks.
Dell provided the test XPS with an installation of XP Home, rather than the XP Professional, which is our normal standard. Since Dell considers the XPS to be a high-end machine targeted at the serious gamer, we compared the performance of the XPS to other machines and boards that we have tested and might be considered by a serious gamer. We included results from the Asus P4C800-E, a top 875P motherboard, and Athlon64 FX, Athlon 64, and Athlon XP 3200+ systems.
| Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor(s): | Intel Pentium 4 at 3.2GHz (800FSB) AMD Athlon64 3200+ (2.0GHz) AMD Athlon64 FX51 (2.2GHz) AMD Athlon XP 3200+ (2.2GHz, 400MHz FSB) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB Mushkin PC3500 Level II 2 x 512MB Mushkin ECC Registered PC3200 2 x 256MB Corsair PC3200 TwinX LL (v1.1) |
| Hard Drive(s): | 2X250GB SATA drives in RAID 0 Array Maxtor 120GB 7200 RPM (8MB Buffer) Western Digital 120GB 7200 RPM (8MB Buffer) |
| Video AGP & IDE Bus Master Drivers: | Intel SATA RAID Drivers VIA 4in1 Hyperion 4.49 (August 20, 2003) NVIDIA nForce version 2.45 (7/29/2003) NVIDIA nForce version 2.03 (1/30/03) |
| Video Card(s): | AT Radeon 9800 XT 256MB (AGP 8X) ATI Radeon 9800 PRO 128MB (AGP 8X) |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 3.7 |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Home (Dell Dimension XPS) Windows XP Professional SP1 |
| Motherboards: | Dell Dimension XPS Gaming System Asus P4C800-E (Intel 875P) 3.2Ghz P4 Abit KV8-MAX3 Gigabyte K8NNXP-940 Athlon64 FX51 Chaintech ZNF3-150 (nForce3) Athlon64 3200+ MSI K8T Neo (VIA K8T800) Athlon64 3200+ DFI NFII Ultra (nForce2 U400) Barton 3200+ |
Recent performance tests on Athlon64, nForce2 Ultra 400 and Intel 875/865 boards used 2 x 512MB Mushkin PC3500 Level II Double-bank memory. The Athlon64 FX requires Registered or Registered ECC memory, so tests with the Gigabyte K8NNXP-940 were performed with Mushkin High Performance Registered ECC DDR400 memory. Previous tests of motherboards used 2 x 256MB Corsair 3200LL Ver. 1.1. Mushkin PC3500 L2 was employed to preserve the 2-2-2-6 timings that were used in tests with Corsair 3200LL Ver. 1.1. Both Mushkin and Corsair use the same Winbond BH5 memory chips in these modules.
All performance tests were run with the ATI 9800 PRO 128MB video card with AGP Aperture set to 128MB with Fast Write enabled. Resolution in all benchmarks is 1024x768x32.
For the fairest comparisons, benchmarks were recompiled for the Asus P4C800-E using a 3.2GHz Pentium4 processor.
Additions to Performance Tests
We have standardized on ZD Labs Internet Content Creation Winstone 2003 and ZD Labs Business Winstone 2002 for system benchmarking.Game Benchmarks
We have added Gun Metal DirectX Benchmark 2 from Yeti Labs, the new X2 Benchmark, which includes Transform and Lighting effects, and Aquamark 3 to our standard game benchmarks. We will be adding other benchmarks in the near future.
The XPS achieved a new high in Content Creation, which has always been one of the better benchmarks for Intel Pentium 4 based machines. With the combination of the 3.2GHz P4, ATI Radon 9800 XT, and the SATA RAID, we see scores approaching 60 for the first time. The Asus P4C800-E should be in the same area, since it was also tested with a 3.2 and 9800 PRO, and the video card does not have a great influence on Multimedia Winstone 2003. The fact that there is still a wide difference between the Asus and Dell in this benchmark tends to indicate that the hard drive has a large influence on the final result, with the huge 500GB SATA RAID pushing the Dell score to new highs. Pentium 4 systems rarely perform as well in General Usage, and the Dell performs here about the same as the Asus P4C800-E system. The newest Athlon64 FX systems dominate this benchmark as we would expect.
You will see in our whole benchmark suite that benchmarks for the Dell XPS are literally all over the place. In some tests, the Dell performs exceptionally well compared to competitive systems and processors, while in other benchmarks, the Dell is inexplicably much poorer than we would expect. We shared our benchmarks with Dell's testing lab before publishing, and in their own test environment, their results were roughly on par with those we found.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
43 Comments
View All Comments
Wesley Fink - Wednesday, November 26, 2003 - link
Flash is used for charts in all AnandTech reviews because it uses less bandwidth than any other option. On a site with very heavy traffic like AnandTech, bandwidth is very important. As Editors, we do not have the option to use other charting methods.If you still have an issue with Flash after hearing the explanation, you should send your complaints to [email protected]
mindless1 - Saturday, November 22, 2003 - link
I would tend to agree that this is a DELL high-end box, and the review best served to acquaint readers with Dell's current offerings, even though most of us do not want to be stuck with $3K worth of unconfigurable equipment that's so proprietary that it'll certainly cost more in the long run due to upgrade hassles.On the other hand, the review used flash images, which is clearly stupid. I'm opposed to flash to begin with, but could understand it IF you needed an animation for some reason, but it wasn't a case of that. Seems more like some people think they know better than the entire world or else have never heard of JPG and GIF.
sador - Thursday, November 20, 2003 - link
MY biggest complaint with this article is that it gives the impression that there are no other "pre-assembled" gaming rigs out there for the money that can compete with it. What a joke! There was a dearth of competitive "pre-builts" in tha article to give a real apples-to-apples comparison. (At least as far as $$$ is concerned)Alienware, like it or not, had pre-config'd systems that will torch this one for less money! Calling this a high-end gaming rig is an insult to qaulity gaming rigs everywhere.
This article did come across as "pandering" a bit to Dell. Whether that was to keep the Dell goods coming, or was sincerely to give this system a fair shake is for every reader to decide for themselves.
madgonad - Thursday, November 20, 2003 - link
to #34 - I don't know how long that coupon is going to last. Since it appears to be part of the Anandtech endorsement package I would guess about 10 days.As you noticed in the benchmarks the Dell was beaten about the head and shoulders by systems far far less the expensive. The excuse was given that the Audigy2 card was to blame since it could not be deactivated. It wasn't mentioned that almost every other system being compared also had an Audigy2 card, making the issue moot.
As to the reason most people have given, tech support, please do not trust anything important to Dell's tech support people. They will tell you to restore the reg or reinstall the OS. After that you get to hunt for the original box in basement to RMA it back to Dell. The onsite people will do the same.
The straight poop is that if you come here you are not the type of consumer to buy the generic-corporate-america product which just gets by. You want a stand-out product that you have control over.
Or put simply. If your shopping for a fast car, do you get a manual or automatic transmission?
cdrsft - Wednesday, November 19, 2003 - link
Can you spell.... SELL OUTway to go AT
jc1x - Wednesday, November 19, 2003 - link
I just did a quick browse to figure out how much it'ld have cost to setup the same system if I were to buy the components..300 MB + Case + PS
500 2x HD w/ SATA
400 P4 3.2 CPU
200 1GB DDR 400 RAM
460 VID - RADEON 9800XT
270 Logitech Z680
175 8x DVD+R/+RW
65 AUDIGY 2
50 XP Home
990 16ms 20.1 in LCD
---
3410
3410 in parts vs 3049* assembled.. (diff $361)
* 3049 = 3299 - 150 (rebate) - 100 off coupon
So, on balance, it's a good deal on price.. performance wise, well, if you want to tweak, buy a new MB for 250 and you'ld still be below component costs.. not to mention shipping costs and the hassle of multiple support locations.
BlackShrike - Tuesday, November 18, 2003 - link
Does anybody else think these comments are ridiculous? The proposed system is only good if you want tech support, a dell, or a very nice LCD. Otherwise, build your own computer. For $3300 I swear you could get the fastest and greatest cpu/motherboard combo of an AMD-51. Then 1 Gb of registered DDR 400. A sound blaster audigy 2. A beautiful surround sound system. A great 19 or 21 inch CRT (I don't like LCDs personnal preference). Then a radeon 9800 XT. A wireless mouse and keyboard. A DVD +/- RW etc and so forth. Hell all these are probably so far under $2500, plus you get the satisfaction of building it, which is quite enjoyable. Oh and why not a nice see through case with lights and cool fans. Basically, I'm saying if you want the best, BUILD IT YOURSELF! If you are lazy then quit bitching or get a Voodo/falcon northwest and lose all the flashy stuff and still pay over $4000. So good job at the review anandtech but I would NEVER buy a dell. AMD IS THE WAY TO BE! Plus all that proprietary stuff that the #5 guy was talking about was right! Man, shame on you anandtech for recommending such a system. Bad, very bad.ComputerBeatnik - Tuesday, November 18, 2003 - link
Please...that's a ton of money just to play games!!! Why not just buy an X-Box for $150?jc1x - Tuesday, November 18, 2003 - link
to #33. try using the code that was provided.. it's now 3299 w/ a 150 rebate = $3149.. no it doesn't have the P4EE but it sure is much cheaper than any comparable.Frankly, I'll probably get one of these.. and when I feel the need to (and actually have the time), just swap the motherboard w/ something tweakable..
madgonad - Tuesday, November 18, 2003 - link
I just went to the Dell website and built the XPS system as described. The regular price is in excess of Five grand when including the EE of the P4.Now if a couple FX51s systems equiped with the same video card and RAID were to be benchmarked, THAT would be a fair and balanced comparison. Anything else looks like a straw-man.