-
CNET editors' rating:
3.5 stars
Very good
Detailed editors' rating - Average user rating: 4.5 stars out of 6 reviews
- See all user reviews
Product summary
The good: Faster than Intel's current fastest, more expensive desktop CPU; beats even AMD's more expensive FX-60 chips on some tests.
The bad: Requires new motherboard and memory; Intel's new, potentially faster CPUs are right around the corner.
The bottom line: AMD's new high-end dual-core CPU offers plenty of bang for the buck, outpacing Intel's Pentium 965 Extreme Edition, which costs $200 more. Sounds like a good deal, but wait to see what Intel's next-gen Core 2 Duo chips have to offer when they debut later this year.
Specifications: Product Type: Processor; Processor Type: AMD Athlon 64 X2 See full specs
CNET editors' review
- Reviewed on: 06/01/2006
- Released on: 05/23/2006
Despite the impending Intel announcement, the X2 5000+ deserves merit. Compared to everything else in the field right now, the X2 5000+ will serve everyone but demanding gamers well. At 2.6GHz per core, it's faster than all of AMD's original X2 series of dual-core CPUs. It was also announced on the same date as the aforementioned Socket AM2 chipset for a reason.
The new AM2 chipset brings all of AMD's CPUs onto an updated motherboard platform, although the company needs to reissue separate AM2 versions of the old Socket 939 chips. The X2 5000+, however, is Socket AM2 only. About all that really means is that you'll need to buy a new motherboard (Socket AM2 and Socket 939 aren't cross-compatible) and new DDR2 memory, since AM2 boards don't use DDR memory. Aside from the memory switch, the only other major advantage of the new platform is reduced power consumption. Whereas on Socket 939, the highest-end X2 chip, the 4800+, required 115 watts from your power supply, the X2 5000+ (and the AM2 version of the 4800+) needs only 89 watts. While we appreciate the improvement, it will really benefit you only if you're building a PC with multiple high-end graphics cards.
Chipset updates aside, the real news about the X2 5000+ is its performance. It performed so well, about the only task we don't recommend it for is extreme gaming. Otherwise, it will give you fast performance at significant cost savings. The best example is our multitasking test. The X2 5000+ finished our test a few seconds faster than the Athlon 64 FX-60, which costs roughly $125 more. And even where it didn't win, the X2 5000+ turned in strong scores. Both its SysMark 2004 scores and its times on our multimedia tests trailed the FX-60 slightly. And for Intel's part, its $1,100 Pentium Extreme Edition 965 chip trailed the X2 5000+ on all but the stand-alone DivX 6.2 encoding test. In other words, the X2 5000+ is a great choice for digital content creation and fast day-to-day computing.
(Longer bars indicate better performance)
 |
SysMark 2004 Internet-content-creation rating | |
BAPCo SysMark 2004 rating | |
SysMark 2004 office-productivity rating |
(Shorter bars indicate better performance)
|
VirusScan 10 and DivX 6.2 |
(Longer bars indicate better performance)
|
Adobe Photoshop CS2 | |
Apple iTunes 6.0.4.2 | |
DivX 6.2 |
- See more CNET content tagged:
- AMD Athlon 64,
- AMD Athlon 64 X2,
- AMD Athlon,
- AMD,
- chipset
User reviews
- Average user rating: 4.5 stars out of 6 reviews
- My rating: 0 stars Write review
-
Showing 3 of 6 user reviewsSee all 6 user reviews
-
11 out of 11 people found this review helpful
"Why is CNET Comparing This to an Intel Chip Not Yet Available"
-
3 out of 3 people found this review helpful
-
1 out of 1 people found this review helpful
- See all 6 user reviews Write review
