HEXUS.reviews :: AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+

[Thorburn]

Thats rather harsh.
The simple fact of the matter that even if the margin of victory is small (and in some of the benchmarks it isn't).
Just look at the gaming benchmarks, the 6000+ is beaten not only by similarly priced E6700 in every test, but by the E6600 which comes in £100 cheaper as well and in some cases the E6400 too.

When Athlon 64 was the leading force the site (and most others out there) was full of AMD adverts as they were on the attack in the enthusiast market. Now they are cutting prices and the second runner on performance (and not to mention probably smarting financially from buying ATI and building fabs) what do you expect but to see the marketing budgets reined in?

Sorry but I'd suggest that Hexus is one of the few sites that these days will call a spade a spade, everyone else is too busy trying not to offend the companies supplying the samples to do anything but give a nice fluffy non-offensive conclusion.

[Clunk]

With enough Intel advertisements on this site to choke a chicken (How does that work exactly?), it's transparantley obvious where loyalties lie here (Yup, where the power is). There are many other review sites out there that have no trouble giving this chip a thumbs up. (Says more about those sites than this one) The bias here is why i've simply stopped reading things on this site. This is the first one i've read in a long time. There aren't ANY realistic situations where there would be any noticable difference between this and an E6700 chip (You clearly havent ever used a C2D for video encoding then), aside from a couple synthetic benchmarks. And i'll bet dollars to doghnuts, that when Barcelona is revealed and let's say it defeats Intel's chips by the amount demonstrated in this review, that there will be droves of people refusing to switch from C2D. Their beloved Intel will spin it and you gullable fanboys will suck it up like a vacuum once again (Did you really sign up to call people fanboys?). As for overclocking, keep your blinders on and try not to look at anything positive in that regard. There are at least 3 reviewers that have clocked the CZ stepping to 3.5 Ghz on air (Wow, 3 really?). I'm not going to list the links for you, look for them yourself if you're interested (which I highly doubt that many here are).
Boy, those advertising dollars must sure be needed.

.

[flippin_waffles]

.

Acutally, no. I signed up 2 years ago to comment on and commend Hexus' site, specifically the benchmark comparison layout at the time. My point is (unlike your point quoted above), is that this chip is certainly a viable alternative. Alot more so than the P4 alternative that many were still pushing during those days (and yes, there were many that were defending that chip). The 6000+ is very price competitive and sits right where it should; between the E6600 and E6700. If you want links, and you can't find them yourself, i can find 'em for ya. Also, considering I don't think i've read one post anywhere of somebody using a high end cpu while gaming at low resolution, low resolution benchmarks, to me, are meaningless. I said the same thing back when A64 ruled the roost. Or are people suggesting that one should buy a high end cpu to go along with a x300 video card? But yeah, if you are going do alot of video encoding, sure it's worthwhile going with a C2D over the X2's. But what if you also do alot of gaming, scientific analysis, etc. and throw in F@H as a bonus where X2 competes very well, and wins in many cases, or falls short by a small margin in others? There are so many people writing A64 off as a worthless, worn out chip and that is simply NOT the case, regardless of what you want to believe.

[Clunk]

How is it viable, when clock for clock, it is slower and more expensive (£100 more expensive) than say an E6600?

Before you start calling me a fanboy (not that I care), but I have had AMD setups for around 8 years or more, and the reason that I went over to the C2D is the simple fact that they are much much faster for what I want. The opteron 170 (2.85ghz)/DFI SLI-D setup I had before this completed a run of encoding in around 2 hours 30mins, this C2D setup does it in around 1 hour.

Everything is faster, from basic windows tasks to Photoshop.

Instead of moaning and calling people fanboys, try out a C2D and see for yourself, you will love it, thats about all there is to say really.

[b0redom]

Not sure why anyone would want to buy a new AM2 chip anyway. AMD are going to have to pull something special out of the bag in order to compete with the already available quad core stuff from Intel.

There is currently no upgrade path for this socket type. C2D seems to support the lowly E4300 right up to the quad core monster.

Personally I'd probably go for the E6600 and overclock it, and put the £100 difference towards a high end graphics card.

Before you start calling me a fanboy, I have an AMD rig.

[kalniel]

There is currently no upgrade path for this socket type. C2D seems to support the lowly E4300 right up to the quad core monster.

Actually I disagree there - the AM2 is a good socket for upgrade paths. It's not like the 939 I'm stuck with.

[Clunk]

Actually I disagree there - the AM2 is a good socket for upgrade paths. It's not like the 939 I'm stuck with.

Coming from 939, would you buy AM2 or C2D?

[Thorburn]

Coming from 939, would you buy AM2 or C2D?

Thats not exactly the same thing as an upgrade path.
AM2 isn't ending at the X2 6000+ and will offer the ability to upgrade to AMD's K10 quad-core parts as well as there dual-core derivitives.

Subjectively LGA775/Core 2 is the better choice, and a known quality unlike AMD's future parts, but the upgrade path on AM2 is still looking fairly strong.

[Clunk]

Never said it was. I'm asking if he would go with the chip we are talking about here and an AM2 motherboard, over a C2D thats all.

[b0redom]

The S939 path was looking good until they released AM2.

[kalniel]

Coming from 939, would you buy AM2 or C2D?

No.

[digit]

I think I have it worse running a socket 754 system. I'm the one who should be annoyed at how it was abandoned fairly rapidly Interesting review of the chip, although I'd still go with Intel and the core 2 duo, they have the price right and the encoding speed. I could actually think about making backup's of my dvd's wheras curently I know its going to take far to long.

[HoldenBurn1000]

I'm just fed up with AMD switching to the new socket type. I bought an X2 939 chip about 18 months ago. I'd like to be able to upgrade it, but for some reason they launched AM2.

As far as I can tell, there seems to be no reason AMD to do this beyond DDR2 support. They're not (noticably) faster. AM2 doesn't give you anything S939 did.

It just means people who already have S939 kit will have to buy all new mobos, and RAM, and to be honest who in their right minds is going to do that when they can get C2D for about the same price?

Took the words right out of my mouth. Seems I am forever upgrading to try and keep up but at least normally it gives me performance boosts. AM2 Just gives me a head ache and a pain in the wallet.

[SpawnofSonic]

I have to say I feel let down by this CPU, its much of the same by AMD, nothing that ground breaking and Conroe still kicks it ass, hopefully soon were see AMD come up with something to rival Intel. If not my next upgrade could see me swing to an Intel and that hasn't been the case for many a year

[davew]

This cpu is just a stop gap I can't really see much advantage over the 5200+. I have a 939 set up but I won't change until AMD come up with something better

Dave

[[GSV]Trig]

I went from a S939 x2 4200 to a C2D 6400 , AM2 wasnt really concidered as the C2D is newer and better, maybe we'll see what AMD do in the future the x2's are great chips but for now the C2D is the chip to have.

And as for buying S939 18 months ago, did you not read any reviews or roadmaps, its not like AMD suddenly one day decided to spring a new socket on the world...