At long last, AMD has launched a low/mid range processor, in the shape of the Duron. The timing of the launch could not be better; the recently announced Athlon Thunderbird wipes the floor with any Intel offering currently available. All signs are the Duron will strike the same blow at Intel's Celeron range.

How we carried out our test
Our objective was to test the performance, implementation, stability, and ease of use of the new AMD Duron processor. To achieve our objective, we used 3DMARK 2000, and BAPCo's SYSmark 2000.

CPU:	AMD Duron 700Mhz CPU - Socket A
Motherboard:	Microstar MSI K7T - VIA KT133 Motherboard
Memory:	128Mb SDRAM Samsung PC133 - 6ns CAS Latency 2
HDD:	IBM DTLA 307030 - 30.0GB UDMA/100 7200rpm
FDD:	3.5" 1.44Mb - Panasonic
CD ROM:	48 x Creative
Video Card:	ELSA Gladiac GeForce2GTS 32Mb DDR
Video Driver:	4.12.01.0202-0040 using Direct X ver 7.0a

Microstar - MSI K7T PRO (MS-6330)
The Motherboard we used to perform our Duron benchmark was from Microstar in Taiwan. The MSI K7T PRO (MS-6330) is based on the VIA KT133 chipset (see figure 1), which consists of the VT8363 North Bridge Controller (see figure 2) and VT82C686A South Bridge Controller (see figure 3). The VT8363 controller support up to four banks of PC 133 SDRAM and Virtual Channel RAM (VCR), fully populated to 2GB, and full AGP v2.0 capability for maximum bus utilisation including 1x, 2x and 4x mode transfers, SBA (SideBand Addressing), Flush/Fence commands, and pipelined burst. In addition the chip supports enhanced PCI bus commands such as Memory-Read-Line, Memory-Read-Multiple and Memory-Write-Invalid commands to minimise snoop overhead. The VT82C686A integrates all system control functions such as ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface); the chipset also supports the Ultra DMA-33/66 IDE transfers. Implementation of DMA/100 would have been to put icing on the cake, but this we are sure will be implemented by Motherboard manufacturers such as Abit when there version of the VIA KT133 is released. Sadly, Microstar are lacking in this department and have shipped the Motherboard with the standard DMA/66 support only. We were not highly impressed with the Microstar motherboard, the manual still had the old VIA chipset code (K7Z) printed on it, and to add insult to injury the manual had obviously not been updated internally being as outdated (support for CPU to only 650Mhz) as the model description. Technical support were emailed on Friday for initial queries which we had, and we eventually got an email from Taiwan, referring us to their support centre in Germany, and that they would be in contact with us. Four days after having the Motherboard there is no sign of the phantom email, and as such we are a little perturbed and would request readers to get assurances of support prior to purchasing a Microstar Motherboard.

AMD Duron Architecture
Before we commence to discuss the performance ratio of the Duron against the other offerings from Intel and AMD it is important for us to understand the core architecture of the processor. The Duron core is based on AMD's 'Spitfire' and is currently based on three clock speeds 600,650 and 700Mhz. The cache architecture features 128-Kbyte L1 cache and a 16-way, on-chip exclusive 64-Kbyte L2 cache featuring a 64-bit data path. The key word being 'exclusive' however, you may be forgiven to think it may be the quantity that matters (64-Kbyte L2), but alas no, contrary to what we have been made to believe in the past. In comparison, the new Intel Celeron 'Coppermine' cache architecture features 32-Kbyte L1 and a 4-way, on-chip inclusive 128-Kbyte L2 cache featuring a 256-bit data path. While the Celeron L1 cache is duplicated within the L2 cache, the Duron operates an 'exclusive' functionality allowing separate operations for both the L1 and L2 cache. In practice this means the Celeron cache is reduced to 128K less 32K = 96-Kbyte, so it really only has 128-Kbyte to operate with. While the Duron retains the full 192-Kbyte to store data. The L2 cache on Duron features a 64-bit data path, while the Celeron features a 256-bit data path, providing the new Celeron with a quadruple L2 bandwidth advantage over the Duron. The L2 cache on the Duron has a 16-way set associative mapping algorithm as opposed to the Celeron which has a 4-way set associative, the reason for this is Intel disables half of the L2 cache on the Pentium III and produces a Celeron, a comparison of the die sizes as being identical provides further confirmation. The Duron on the other hand is manufactured with a smaller die size, and thus retains the 16-way set associative L2 cache just like the Athlon 'Thunderbird'. The Duron die size is 100 mm2 while the Thunderbird is 120 mm2 and hence AMD can produce the Duron cheaper than the Thunderbird. Intel on the other hand, cannot reduce the cost of production, as the Celeron and Intel Pentium III are identical except for the L2 cache and System Bus.

The Low/Middle range processor battle has begun the two main players Intel and AMD have their processors in their respective corners, both have individual advantages over the other, is there a single major factor that will set them apart? We think so, what used to be Intel's advantage at one time is now Intel's undoing by restricting the Celeron to a 66Mhz Front Side Bus while AMD has gone all out with a 200Mhz Front Side Bus. This has a significant impact on performance, and provides Duron with a tremendous overall advantage.

Performance
The Duron CPU performed exceptionally well in our 3DMARK 2000 (see figure 4) benchmark resulting in a score of 5950 (see figure 5) in 800 x 600-16bit and 5567 (see figure 6) in 1024 x 768-16bit modes, this compares well with our test on and AMD Athlon 750Mhz classic processor with the ABIT KA7 - KX133 based motherboard. In our SYSmark 2000 benchmark the story was a little different with a score of 138 which again compares with a 750Mhz Athlon but slightly lower than the score we anticipated, this is mainly down to the 'plain vanilla' Microstar K7T motherboard. All in all, the AMD Duron turned in an excellent set of results.

Verdict
The entry/mid range processor has been a long while coming from AMD, the Duron has made the waiting worthwhile, and in comparison to the 'Coppermine' based Celeron the Duron turns on the heat and you know what they say about heat; 'if you can't take it get out of the kitchen' The Duron is an exclusive design and 'not a cut down version' of it's big brother, as such we are sure the Duron will be adopted well, and AMD deserves the recognition the Duron will bring, we have no hesitation in awarding the Duron our One2Surf Excellence award. Well-done AMD.

Congratulations to AMD for winning our One2surf Excellence Award!!

Back to top