Unleash the Power of Dual Athlon MP Processors - Discover the AMD 760 MPX Platform

Find AI Tools
No difficulty
No complicated process
Find ai tools

Unleash the Power of Dual Athlon MP Processors - Discover the AMD 760 MPX Platform

Table of Contents:

  1. Introduction
  2. System Configuration
  3. Benchmarking with WCPUID
  4. Monitoring with Motherboard Monitor
  5. Benchmarking with Blender 2.49
  6. Benchmarking with Cinebench 2000
  7. Benchmarking with Cinebench 2003
  8. Benchmarking with 7-zip
  9. Benchmarking with HD Tune
  10. Benchmarking with Quake 3
  11. Benchmarking with Quake 4
  12. Benchmarking with Doom 3
  13. Benchmarking with Halo
  14. System Performance and Stability Evaluation
  15. Pros and Cons
  16. Conclusion


In this article, we will be exploring the performance and capabilities of a unique computer system built around the AMD 760 MPX platform. This system boasts dual AMD Athlon MP 2000+ processors and offers intriguing possibilities for productivity and gaming enthusiasts alike. From benchmarking tests to evaluating stability, we will delve into the various aspects of this system to determine its pros, cons, and overall performance. So, let's dive in and discover the untapped potential of this retro powerhouse.

System Configuration

Before we jump into the benchmarking tests, let's take a moment to discuss the configuration of our AMD 760 MPX system. This will help us understand the hardware components used and lay the foundation for our performance evaluation.

Our system is built around the Taian S2466 Tiger MPX motherboard, a cornerstone of the AMD 760 MPX platform. It features dual socket A slots, supporting the installation of two AMD Athlon MP 2000+ processors. To complement the processing power, we have equipped the system with two gigabytes of DDR server RAM. In terms of graphics, we have opted for an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro, which provides decent performance for a system of this vintage. Additionally, we have added a PsiX SATA 2 controller card on a PCI bus to enhance the system's storage capabilities.

Now that we have familiarized ourselves with the system configuration, let's proceed to the benchmarking tests to assess its true performance potential.

Benchmarking with WCPUID

To kick off our evaluation, let's start with a benchmarking tool called WCPUID. This tool will help us determine the processing power of our AMD Athlon MP 2000+ CPUs and provide insights into their capabilities.

Upon opening the WCPUID tool, we can Instantly check the clock speed and cache size of our processors. Each CPU in our system is an AMD Athlon MP model six, running at 1660 megahertz with 256 kilobytes of L2 cache. With the CPU information at HAND, we are ready to proceed to the next phase of our benchmarking journey.

Monitoring with Motherboard Monitor

Before we delve deeper into benchmarking, let's take a moment to monitor the system temperatures and fan speeds using a tool called Motherboard Monitor. This will enable us to keep an eye on the system's thermal performance and ensure optimal stability during the benchmarking process.

As we observe the data provided by Motherboard Monitor, it's important to note that the sensor readings should be taken with a grain of salt. The CPUs themselves do not have temperature sensors; instead, the motherboard qualifies guest temperatures based on the socket's ambient air temperature. This extrapolation allows us to monitor the CPU temperatures, CPU fan RPM, and front fan RPM. With the monitoring in place, we can now proceed with the benchmarking tests.

Benchmarking with Blender 2.49

To gauge the system's rendering capabilities, let's turn our attention to Blender 2.49, a popular 3D animation software. By performing rendering tasks on this software, we can assess the system's efficiency in handling multi-threaded workloads.

We will begin by running a rendering task on a single thread, disabling SMT (Simultaneous Multi-Threading). This will provide us with a baseline performance measurement. Upon analyzing the task manager during the rendering process, we can see that the CPU utilization hovers around 50%.

Now, let's configure Blender 2.49 for SMP (Symmetric Multi-Processing) with two Threads and Rerun the rendering task. As expected, the performance is significantly improved, with the rendering completing in a shorter duration. By comparing the two rendering times, we can conclude that utilizing both CPUs provides a considerable performance boost.

Benchmarking with Cinebench 2000

Moving on to our next benchmarking tool, let's explore Cinebench 2000. This software is designed to measure the performance of CPUs and graphics cards using various rendering tasks.

To evaluate the system's performance, we will first run the ray tracing benchmark on a single CPU core. Upon completion, we obtain a score of 22.89. Next, we will run the same benchmark on both CPUs simultaneously. The result is a score of 28.54, showcasing an improvement of 68%.

Benchmarking with Cinebench 2003

Continuing our evaluation with Cinebench, let's now focus on Cinebench 2003. This benchmarking software provides a comprehensive evaluation of the system's multi-threaded performance.

Starting with a single CPU core, we initiate the benchmarking process and Record a score of 208 points. Now, let's enable SMP and rerun the benchmark. The result shows a score of 382 points, indicating an 80% increase in performance.

Benchmarking with 7-zip

Next on our benchmarking journey, we will explore the performance of the system using 7-zip. This popular compression software employs multi-threading, making it an excellent choice for testing the system's capabilities.

During the benchmark, both CPUs are heavily utilized as we compress and decompress files. The high CPU usage is a testament to the system's efficiency in handling multi-threaded workloads. With a built-in benchmark feature, 7-zip provides us with valuable insights into the system's performance.

Based on the benchmark results, we can gauge the system's ability to take advantage of both CPUs. Comparing the performance of a single CPU to that of two CPUs, we observe an 8% increase in overall speed.

Benchmarking with HD Tune

To evaluate the storage performance of our system, we will employ HD Tune, a benchmarking tool specifically designed for hard drives and SSDs. This will allow us to assess the system's ability to read and write data at varying block sizes.

Upon running the benchmark, we obtain maximum transfer speeds of 142 megabytes per Second for the SSD and 111 megabytes per second for the mechanical hard drive. As expected, the performance of the mechanical hard drive starts to decline towards the end of the test due to its inherent limitations.

By adjusting the block size to eight megabytes, we can push the limits of the storage devices. The SSD reaches a theoretical maximum speed of 172.8 megabytes per second, while the mechanical hard drive achieves a maximum speed of 127 megabytes per second.

Benchmarking with Quake 3

Now, let's shift our focus to gaming performance and explore how our system handles the popular Game, Quake 3. By benchmarking this game, we can gain valuable insights into the system's gaming capabilities.

Initiating the game without SMP, we run the first benchmark and obtain a score of 221.6 frames per second. Now, let's enable SMP and rerun the benchmark. The result shows a significant improvement, with a score of 260.8 frames per second. This showcases a 17.7% increase in gaming performance with the utilization of both CPUs.

Benchmarking with Quake 4

Continuing our exploration of gaming performance, let's now shift our attention to Quake 4, a game released in 2005 that utilizes the id Tech 4 engine. This game serves as an interesting comparison to Quake 3, as it showcases the impact of SMP support on gaming performance.

During the benchmarking process, we can clearly observe the difference in performance between SMP disabled and SMP enabled runs. With SMP disabled, the game finishes at 29 frames per second. However, with SMP enabled, the performance significantly improves, reaching 49 frames per second. This showcases a remarkable 69% increase in gaming performance.

Benchmarking with Doom 3

In our Quest to evaluate gaming performance on our AMD 760 MPX system, let's now turn our attention to Doom 3. This game, released in 2004, presents an interesting case study as it lacks SMP support. This allows us to witness the impact of utilizing a single core on gaming performance.

Running Doom 3 with the graphical settings adjusted to maintain a playable frame rate, we observe a performance drop compared to Quake 4. With frame rates occasionally falling below 20 frames per second, it is clear that Doom 3 poses a challenge to our AMD 760 MPX system's gaming capabilities. However, it is worth noting that with a more powerful CPU and graphics card, this game can still be played with acceptable frame rates.

Benchmarking with Halo

Our final gaming benchmark brings us to Halo, a visually stunning game with built-in benchmarking capabilities. Although Halo does not support SMP, we include it in our evaluation due to its popularity and the demand it places on hardware.

Running the benchmark, we achieve a frame rate of 45.75 frames per second. While not the fastest, this frame rate is still considered playable. It is important to note that running Halo on our AMD 760 MPX system requires a powerful GPU to maintain smooth gameplay.

System Performance and Stability Evaluation

After meticulous benchmarking and performance testing, it's time to evaluate the overall performance and stability of our AMD 760 MPX system. Throughout our extensive testing period, the system has proven to be exceptionally stable. We have encountered zero crashes thus far, even during the Windows installation process. This stability is a testament to the reliability of the AMD 760 MPX platform.

In terms of performance, our dual AMD Athlon MP 2000+ CPUs have demonstrated remarkable scalability, achieving performance gains of up to 90% in certain applications. The platform's support for 64-bit architecture and the utilization of both CPUs effectively enhance productivity and multi-threaded workloads.

Furthermore, the inclusion of a 66MHz PCI bus and five bridge connectors allows for the seamless integration of high-speed controller cards. This ensures optimal performance and expandability, making the AMD 760 MPX system an excellent choice for server applications.

However, it's important to acknowledge the limitations of the platform. Overclocking is not supported on the particular motherboard used in this build, and the maximum bus speed for AMD Athlon MP CPUs is 266MHz. Additionally, the use of AGP 4x limits the graphics card's performance, which may hinder achieving high frame rates in demanding games.

Power consumption is another factor to consider, as our system draws around 180 watts at idle and 220-230 watts under load. However, with a temperature-controlled rear fan and hardware acceleration for network and sound cards, we can mitigate some power-related challenges.

With these aspects in mind, it's clear that the AMD 760 MPX platform offers a unique and stable environment for retro computing enthusiasts. Its ability to leverage dual CPUs effectively, coupled with its expandability and reliability, make it an enticing choice for those seeking a retro powerhouse.

Pros and Cons


  1. Exceptional stability, with zero crashes observed during testing
  2. Scalability and performance gains of up to 90% utilizing dual CPUs
  3. Support for 64-bit architecture enhances productivity and multi-threaded workloads
  4. Easy installation process with minimal driver requirements
  5. Five bridge connectors allow for high-speed controller cards
  6. Individual device recognition in the BIOS enables efficient booting and identification
  7. Effective cooling with temperature-controlled fans and hardware-accelerated sound cards
  8. Retro Charm and enjoyment of building and using a dual-processor system


  1. Limited overclocking options on certain motherboards
  2. Maximum bus speed of 266MHz for AMD Athlon MP CPUs
  3. AGP 4x interface limits graphics card performance in demanding games
  4. Relatively high power consumption


In conclusion, our evaluation of the AMD 760 MPX system has shed light on its impressive stability and performance. Contrary to preconceived notions of the platform, it has proven to be highly reliable, with zero crashes encountered. The scalability offered by the dual AMD Athlon MP 2000+ CPUs allows for significant performance gains in multi-threaded workloads.

While certain limitations, such as overclocking options and AGP 4x interface, should be taken into account, the retro charm and unique capabilities of the AMD 760 MPX platform make it a compelling choice for retro enthusiasts. Whether you're looking to delve into productivity tasks, host game servers, or simply enjoy the process of building and using a dual-processor system, the AMD 760 MPX platform offers a stable and efficient solution.

So, if you're interested in reliving the retro computing experience, we highly recommend considering the AMD 760 MPX platform as the foundation for your next build. Experience the thrill of harnessing the power of dual CPUs and unlock a world of possibilities with this Hidden gem of a system.

Thank you for joining us on this exploration of the AMD 760 MPX system. For more information about our upcoming events and to connect with like-minded retro enthusiasts, visit our social media webpage here and join our vibrant community.

Are you spending too much time looking for ai tools?
App rating
AI Tools
Trusted Users

TOOLIFY is the best ai tool source.

Browse More Content