Overclocking
Overclocking the 65nm AM2 X2 5000+ was an interesting experience.
I managed to get it running with FSB speeds as high as 345MHz - but only with significantly reduced multipliers. In order to get the best possible balanced score, I spent a lot of time trying different multiplier and FSB combinations, and frankly my experiments were made needlessly frustrating by the unpredictable ways it would choose the memory speed dividers.
If only the BIOS would have let me set the memory ratios directly, I am certain I could have achieved even better scores than I did.
Regardless, 3.192GHz for a socket AM2 processor, with air cooling, is no mean feat, and is definitely a decent overclock - we've just been spoiled by the insanely great overclocking headroom available on Core 2 Duo processors, where even 1.8GHz processors can regularly hit 3.4GHz with air cooling.
How did I get to 3.192GHz?
- Vcore set to 1.50V
- Used high end Corsair PC2-8500 memory
- Memory set to the "667MHz" setting, resulting in a 1064MHz data rate at 4-4-4-12 timings
- Used the excellent Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe motherboard
I suspect that a lower end 65nm Athlon 64 X2 processor such as the X2 3600+ or the X2 3800+ would also overclock to almost 3.2GHz - which would be a very good "bang for the buck" indeed.
Power Consumption
One of the benefits of a geometry shrink from 90nm to 65nm is supposedly lower power consumption - but can we measure a difference?
As you can see, at the default clock speed and voltage there is no measurable difference.
When overclocked, the 90nm X2 5000+ running at 1.5V at 3.0GHz consumed 6.3% more power at 6.4% lower speed than the 3.192GHz 65nm part at 1.425V, and while that is not an earth shaking difference, it is measurable.
Conclusion
If you are building a general purpose computer for the home or office, or want a multimedia box, the 65nm AMD AM2 X2 5000+ will certainly be able to perform whatever tasks you throw at it.
It will perform better than a Core 2 E4300 based system, and will be running neck and neck with an E6300 based processor, which are priced almost exactly the same.
Examining the results of the testing, we can tell that the current perception that "you should not buy AM2, only buy Core 2 Duo's" is not based on reality - because for people who don't overclock, there is really little difference in perfomance - so for example if you see a really good deal on an AM2 system from a vendor, you should seriously consider it, as you could save significant money and still get excellent performance.
If you can get an E6400 or higher model Core 2 Duo based system for the same price, get that instead - frankly AMD needs to bring the Barcelona to market, and have it perform better than the Core 2 Duo/Quad at similar prices for AMD to recapture the high end and enthusiast market... but remember something: Most systems sold are low to mid range systems, so if AMD captures a large percentage of the low/mid range market, it can do very well indeed!
Now if you are an enthusiast like me, and want to overclock like crazy... go with a Core 2 Duo. The Core 2's have incredible overclocking headroom - heck with extreme cooling I managed to get an
E4300 all the way up to 3.6GHz - twice its rated 1.8GHz!
forums
send article 
hardware newsletter 
article comments (8) 
Lowest prices check
Digg this!
del.icio.us