Gaming: Quake III, UT2003, X2 and 3DMark
Though these systems are not what I would call “game machines” there is a chance that you’ll want to do a bit of gaming even on a budget system. Keep in mind of course that a lot of what these results are showing is not only the difference between the processors, but also the difference in the on-board video solutions, one from NVIDIA and one from ATI.
Both Quake III and UT2003 are showing better gaming performance on the AMD Sempron platform system. The gains are considerable on the Quake III test but somewhat less impressive on the UT2003 benchmark. In fact, in the minimum detail test, the Celeron system is able to win a couple of times.
Though the low-resolution results are about on par with each other, the ATI/Intel platform does much better on this DX8 game at 1024x768x32.
Where AMD has traditionally done well, it does so again on the 3D Mark 2001 results. Overall, for gaming, the results are relatively close.
We run more tests later in the artilce that feature a discrete graphics solution to see how much the processors differ when we use the same graphics platform.
