Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Will a $500 AM2 5000+ be the chip to beat?

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 14, 2006 3:40:40 AM

The benchmarks are strating o trickle in and the Core 2 seem sto be living up to early marks, though th e6700 gives as good an experinence as the 6800 in real world tests. Tests only clocked the 6800 to 3.46 but it shows a slight improvement per clock.

The surprise is the $700 (currently) AM2 5000+ which has stolen the thunder of the 939 FX60 stealing wins in several benches though slower in others.

If AMD includes this in their price drops and knocks off 30% off the price, it wiould put in well within range of the 6700 for price/perf. An Extreme OC of this from VooDooPC would be a powerful box.

More about : 500 am2 5000 chip beat

July 14, 2006 9:18:01 AM

Sadly, not.
At most for its performance it could take the 6600, if competitively priced, which means, $300 at best.
Even though i'm an AMD supporter (not because of Intel "being evil" :lol: , but just because if AMD gets knocked out, then Intel can do whatever it wants concerning prices, roadmaps, etc), i think that the 6600 is such a sweet CPU.
It has unbeatable price/performance (and even price/performance/watt), and it seems to be even extremely good for overclocking..
And the models below it have just half the cache and are not significantly cheaper so..

EDIT: i wish there was a 6600 equivalent in the graphic card market.. then i'd build a new rig immediately! :) 
July 14, 2006 9:31:39 AM

My ears pricked up when I first heard about the 5000 X2 and I thought this would be a good alternative. If it was available on 939 I would certainly take this seriously as it would be a very easy upgrade path for me.

But bearing in mind I'd need to change the motherboard and RAM to get this CPU, and also considering that even at US $500 it doesn't stack up to an E6600, this chip can stay sitting on the shelf.

It would have to be sub US $300 to attact serious consideration.
Related resources
July 14, 2006 11:06:31 AM

No it will not be the one to beat as its already taken a beating from the C2D's

July 14, 2006 11:29:17 AM

Quote:
No it will not be the one to beat as its already taken a beating from the C2D's





A system is more than the CPU. Overall I think the 5000+ is an excellent value. Even in the face of Core 2. That's just my opinion, though. ANd yes I read the reviews. I'm more interestedt in the 5000+ and 4600+ which are still near the top of the pyramid.

I won't buy either but if I were buying I'd end up with AM2. I've had better successes with AMD lately. DOn't want to jinx it.
July 14, 2006 12:12:51 PM

So you'd gladly pay US $200 more because you believe it will prevent a jinx?

Hey, want to have a look at these magic beans that I've got for sale? You can grow FX-64s on them...

Disclaimer: as with the current AMD roadmap, no set time can be given for harvest of said FX-64 CPUs from said beans.
July 14, 2006 1:13:14 PM

The 5000+ will not be $500.
Time and time again I tell you people and you just dont listen.
Amd will still hold the price/performance advantage when conroe comes out, that is their strategy. That has been there strategy for 10 years.
You get what you pay for no matter what brand you buy.
If a Core duo 2.6 costs say $400 and it competes or surpasses fx-62 in performance, then fx-62 will be priced at $350, thats the way it works people. You cannot sell an inferior item for more money.
July 14, 2006 1:14:38 PM

I think the title of the thread should be changed to:
Will a $300 AM2 5000+ be a competitive chip?
July 14, 2006 1:16:42 PM

Quote:
Time and time again I tell you people and you just dont listen.


That'll be because you talk rubbish.
July 14, 2006 1:19:19 PM

Quote:
I think the title of the thread should be changed to:
Will a $300 AM2 5000+ be a competitive chip?


and the answer will still be NO!!
July 14, 2006 1:26:53 PM

Well, why not?
It's performance should be just a tad lower than E6600, yet would be slightly cheaper + 4x4 possible + cheaper chipset + good support for SLI + a stable platform which should support next generation CPUs.
I think it wouldn'te be too bad.
July 14, 2006 1:34:57 PM

Gawd.. give it time.

Price wise... the 5000+ is still roughly 730-890 Bucks.

E6600 is roughtly going to be 340-390 Bucks.

Either way.. you need to give things time to either buy the E6600 or till price changes make the 5000+ more attractive.

As far as 4x4... heh for 15 percent increase at double the cost, I don't seem to find it attractive.
July 14, 2006 1:38:34 PM

After reading all these reviews, you are still thinking about buying AMD?..
You must be really stupid.. Why don't you just buy Conroe..
Even a grad school kid can make that logical decision.
July 14, 2006 1:42:28 PM

Well sure a 5000+ at 7-800 bucks does not make any sense, and so at 500$, so i just made an hypotheses, at which price point it would start to make sense to me.
Concerning 4x4, i wouldnt say that 15% increase at twice the price wouldn't make sense.
Think about this: E6700 costs almost double as E6600, and has only 10% higher clock speed..
But the real problem is, there is no guarantee that 4x4 would give a 15% boost on performance, it was just a poor (not pure, no pun intended) speculation from a poor webpage.
Obviously the gain would go from 0% to 80% depending on the application, but i dont know if there is any popular application which can really benefit from quad core.
It's just that the possibility is interesting, if the price of the platform is right.
July 14, 2006 1:43:18 PM

There are still good arguments to buy AMD following their price cuts, but these are now just mostly for those people upgrading just a CPU and who don't also want to upgrade the motherboard and RAM etc.

If you're buying new or as good as, the situation will become clearer by the end of this month once the AMD price cuts have settled down, and moer importantly, the retailers have decided how they will react to them.
July 14, 2006 2:44:40 PM

If as MrsD states, you get what you pay for, the EE Pentium D should never have been priced at $999, thus, at least in that cause, her theory is way off. However, with AMD lowering there prices and all the hype and demand on Conroe, I could easily see people buying up 5000's because they will actually be on the shelves. So, maybe for 3-4 months, they will be a good bargan. Once availability of Conroe improves, they would need to be priced further down, no doubt. but until then, they may be a good deal.
July 14, 2006 3:36:40 PM

Are you trying and having a hard time buying a Conroe? I know if I had the desire and cash for a new CPU, I would and could get one even before the official release date, and it looks like even easier after that...
July 14, 2006 3:39:25 PM

Will a $500 AM2 5000+ be the chip to beat?

NO!

Why buy a $500 Athlon 64 X2 5000+ when you can get a $320 E6600 that beats the FX-62 in nearly all benchmarks?

Baron, look at the facts and the numbers.

There's only only one piece left to Intel's puzzle: Ship the chips! (And that's about to happen)
July 14, 2006 3:43:04 PM

Quote:
The 5000+ will not be $500.
Time and time again I tell you people and you just dont listen.
Amd will still hold the price/performance advantage when conroe comes out, that is their strategy. That has been there strategy for 10 years.
You get what you pay for no matter what brand you buy.
If a Core duo 2.6 costs say $400 and it competes or surpasses fx-62 in performance, then fx-62 will be priced at $350, thats the way it works people. You cannot sell an inferior item for more money.
Stop smoking crack!!!They should have registered forum residents submit a drug test before they can begin posting, and one every month following that. Many would fail. :o 
July 14, 2006 3:50:02 PM

If they reduced the price that much (presumably including FX-60 / 939 chips) I wouldn't hesitate just to grab an FX-60, run that for a year or so and wait for Core 2 Duo to become more mature (as well as Vista) and then review. I'm sure there'd be plenty of other 939 users who would think the same way.
July 14, 2006 3:57:17 PM

Quote:
Quote:
No (X2-5000) it will not be the one to beat as its already taken a beating from the C2D's

A system is more than the CPU. Overall I think the 5000+ is an excellent value. Even in the face of Core 2. That's just my opinion, though. ANd yes I read the reviews. I'm more interestedt in the 5000+ and 4600+ which are still near the top of the pyramid.

I won't buy either but if I were buying I'd end up with AM2. I've had better successes with AMD lately. DOn't want to jinx it.


Not to mention the X2-5000 will cost more and perform less, in order to make that AMD chip perform decently, you must also pay more for high quality and low latency DDR2 800 memory, whereas the lower cost Conroes outperform even when using high latency cheap DDR2 533.

And of course if you want to overclock, AMD once again disappoints, since Intel has been leading in overclocking CPU's for years.
July 14, 2006 3:59:24 PM

Quote:
Stop smoking crack!!!They should have registered forum residents submit a drug test before they can begin posting, and one every month following that. Many would fail. :o 


Haha.

My next CPU purchase is going to be a cheap S939 dual-core because upgrading will be the most cost-efficient thing for me to do. So all this Conroe stuff will still benefit me by making AMD prices lower.

If I was building a new system I would pick Conroe, hand spanking down.

All of you AMD mindless fanboys are making yourself look silly. Just admint that Conroe is FREAKING AWESOME! Stop trying to make up pricing stratgies that put the FX-62 at $320 or whatever, it's not going to go that low.
July 14, 2006 4:01:56 PM

Quote:
All of you AMD mindless fanboys are making yourself look silly. Just admint that Conroe is FREAKING AWESOME! Stop trying to make up pricing stratgies that put the FX-62 at $320 or whatever, it's not going to go that low.


Even at that price, the performance of the FX chips are not worth it even then! :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 

Maybe AMD needs to start giving the CPU's away if you buy their motherboards!!!
July 14, 2006 4:15:33 PM

Yes, the AM2 5000+ WILL be the chip to beat...............







...............like a Conroe pimp beats a 5000+ whore who owes him money.
July 14, 2006 4:17:57 PM

Quote:
Maybe AMD needs to start giving the CPU's away if you buy their motherboards!!!


That'd be a great plan if AMD made motherboards... But they can still give me a S939 FX-60 for free, if they want, I'll take it!
July 14, 2006 4:21:58 PM

Quote:
If a Core duo 2.6 costs say $400 and it competes or surpasses fx-62 in performance, then fx-62 will be priced at $350, thats the way it works people. You cannot sell an inferior item for more money



Um, what was intel doing with Netburst them?
July 14, 2006 4:22:17 PM

If you check out NewEgg, they've got some nice free combo deals with AMD processors. I believe if you buy one of the FX series, you get a choice of 17" LCD, 1gb memory, motherboard, a 320gb hard drive or an mp3 player for free. They're trying to move those bad boys out before the Conroes come.
July 14, 2006 4:25:05 PM

Quote:
Quote:
No (X2-5000) it will not be the one to beat as its already taken a beating from the C2D's

A system is more than the CPU. Overall I think the 5000+ is an excellent value. Even in the face of Core 2. That's just my opinion, though. ANd yes I read the reviews. I'm more interestedt in the 5000+ and 4600+ which are still near the top of the pyramid.

I won't buy either but if I were buying I'd end up with AM2. I've had better successes with AMD lately. DOn't want to jinx it.


Not to mention the X2-5000 will cost more and perform less, in order to make that AMD chip perform decently, you must also pay more for high quality and low latency DDR2 800 memory, whereas the lower cost Conroes outperform even when using high latency cheap DDR2 533.

And of course if you want to overclock, AMD once again disappoints, since Intel has been leading in overclocking CPU's for years.Also, the 5000+ has an uneven multiplier, therefore that DDR800 isn't going to be running at 800. :?
July 14, 2006 4:28:30 PM

Quote:
If you check out NewEgg, they've got some nice free combo deals with AMD processors. I believe if you buy one of the FX series, you get a choice of 17" LCD, 1gb memory, motherboard, a 320gb hard drive or an mp3 player for free. They're trying to move those bad boys out before the Conroes come.
Like Intel has been doing for the last year with Celeron D's. :wink: I bought a Celeron 340 and Mach Speed mobo combo for my dad from TigerDirect.ca in January. $85 after MIR. Cheaper than the OEM processor alone.
July 14, 2006 4:28:37 PM

Quote:
If as MrsD states, you get what you pay for, the EE Pentium D should never have been priced at $999, thus, at least in that cause, her theory is way off.

His/her theory is not so off.
In the $999 of the Pentium EE, you were paying for branding.
AMD's cpus are at a disadvantage here, so they can't do the same.
I dont know what AMD will do with their FX line, since this is an enthusiasts CPU which includes many factors into its price (like again branding and being a "premium" product etc), but i'm quite sure that the normal X2 will be priced competitively with Conroe according to their true performance.
At least, this is what AMD's press release has stated today.
July 14, 2006 4:34:12 PM

Quote:

Um, what was intel doing with Netburst them?

Everybody, stop comparing AMD's current situation with Netburst!
Intel was the market leader!
The only brand associated with a quality image!
A lot of people would perceive even an INTEL Celeron as a "higher quality" product than any AMD cpu, which represented the "smart - buy" alternative (in terms of super-market lingo :)  )
Even so, the inferior product had its market share slowly eroded over time.
AMD now has certainly much better brand recognition than in the past, but it won't sell its CPUs thanks to branding alone, no way!
They're still the underdog.
July 14, 2006 4:39:42 PM

Quote:
If you check out NewEgg, they've got some nice free combo deals with AMD processors. I believe if you buy one of the FX series, you get a choice of 17" LCD, 1gb memory, motherboard, a 320gb hard drive or an mp3 player for free. They're trying to move those bad boys out before the Conroes come.
Like Intel has been doing for the last year with Celeron D's. :wink: I bought a Celeron 340 and Mach Speed mobo combo for my dad from TigerDirect.ca in January. $85 after MIR. Cheaper than the OEM processor alone.
I wouldn't be suprised if they have similar deals with the X2 processors next month. If I was building a budget system, that'd be something to look for.
July 14, 2006 4:41:18 PM

Quote:
Gawd.. give it time.

Price wise... the 5000+ is still roughly 730-890 Bucks.

E6600 is roughtly going to be 340-390 Bucks.

Either way.. you need to give things time to either buy the E6600 or till price changes make the 5000+ more attractive.

As far as 4x4... heh for 15 percent increase at double the cost, I don't seem to find it attractive.



It's 696 at Monarch. Under $700. Because of people like the Intel guys here, I WOULD NEVER BUY AN INTEL UNLESS THEY DON'T LET YOU BUY THEM.

I would tell people to buy AMD anyway. Why because I liek what they stand for as a company. Collaboration and not isolation. Sharing and not owning.

You gusy should jsut hope that K8 Quad DOESN'T come out, because with bandwidth AM2 will atke the crown back from kentsfield.

And K8L will more than likely do unspeakable things to Clovertown. let's just face it, AMD is not going anywhere and the real world tests don't show that big of a lead.

I would liek to see the same HardOCP marks with a 7950GX2 at 1600. If i had a 21" LCD I woud never even see what 1024 looked like. Stop living in this the world exists in a benchmark at 800x600 fantasy.
July 14, 2006 4:48:53 PM

Quote:
Stop living in this the world exists in a benchmark at 800x600 fantasy.


But if AMD came out with a really fast processor you would be touting it's 800x600 marks and how they spanked Intel.

Stop being a FanBoy.

So your also joining the, "Conroe is so powerful you shouldn't buy it" camp with Mad Mod Mike?

Sad.
July 14, 2006 4:49:26 PM

Quote:
let's just face it, AMD is not going anywhere


I'm going to be quoting that for weeks...

Look, if you like buying AMD because of their company values etc, that's fine. If you ilke the logo more, or green is your favourite colour etc fine - just say so. What annoys a lot of people here though is when the fanboys then try and strap on some ridiculous lie about performance, future or otherwise in order to try and justify their choice.
July 14, 2006 4:55:30 PM

Here's my big question for AMD. If you are lowing prices on x2's and you already did so on single-core Athlons, why are Semprons staying the same price? If the 2800 Sempron were lowered to say $40, about where it should be in my opinion, it would be awesome for making REAL budget systems, and keep AMD's name in the press/consumers' eyes.
July 14, 2006 4:55:44 PM

Quote:
The 5000+ will not be $500.
Time and time again I tell you people and you just dont listen.
Amd will still hold the price/performance advantage when conroe comes out, that is their strategy. That has been there strategy for 10 years.
You get what you pay for no matter what brand you buy.
If a Core duo 2.6 costs say $400 and it competes or surpasses fx-62 in performance, then fx-62 will be priced at $350, thats the way it works people. You cannot sell an inferior item for more money.
Stop smoking crack!!!They should have registered forum residents submit a drug test before they can begin posting, and one every month following that. Many would fail. :o 

When it happens and your proven wrong once agan, can I bitch slap you?
AMD will still win the price/performance game. That has been amd's strategy for 10 years. Bet on it.
Why would anyone want to buy amd? Ummm...because Im going to get the same/better performance per dollar as I will with an intel processor. I'll try to be easy on you when you get smacked down, K?
July 14, 2006 5:01:27 PM

Quote:
The 5000+ will not be $500.
Time and time again I tell you people and you just dont listen.
Amd will still hold the price/performance advantage when conroe comes out, that is their strategy. That has been there strategy for 10 years.
You get what you pay for no matter what brand you buy.
If a Core duo 2.6 costs say $400 and it competes or surpasses fx-62 in performance, then fx-62 will be priced at $350, thats the way it works people. You cannot sell an inferior item for more money.

well this is what AMD SHOULD do.

but the question is, can they lower the price to that point? are they going to lose their margin because of taking 75% off on their flagship chip, FX-62?

and from the foreseeable future, i would say even FX-66 can't even outperforms E6700. so are you telling me that FX-66 is going to be $300 when it releases?
July 14, 2006 5:05:11 PM

Quote:
well this is what AMD SHOULD do.

but the question is, can they lower the price to that point? are they going to lose their margin because of taking 75% off on their flagship chip, FX-62?

and from the foreseeable future, i would say even FX-66 can't even outperforms E6700. so are you telling me that FX-66 is going to be $300 when it releases?


Check and mate.

Mrs. D provides speculations and what she THINKS that AMD will do. It's not based on any fact, report, or even on a rumor. Not even the Inquirer would report FX-62 @ $300.
July 14, 2006 5:08:50 PM

Change the title to "Will a $50 AM2 5000+ be the chip to beat?" and you *might* have had a chance of taking away some interest from the imminent Core2Duo release. As it stands, you failed.
Synergy6
July 14, 2006 5:20:01 PM

Geesh... why did you reply to my post?

I don't really care what you will buy, and what you won't.

$4 under $700 doesn't impress me either. Thats still a hefty price to pay for 5000+ comparied to E6600. Not to mention both products are fairly new.

And as far as 4x4, I could care less if it takes the performance crown.

The performance/price/market war between Intel and AMD is never ending. Unless one of them really screws up, and goes out of buisness, then everyone should be some what worried.

The crap you guys dish out at each other doesn't impact on sales. I wish you guys would give it a break.
July 14, 2006 5:25:24 PM

Quote:
I wish you guys would give it a break.


I think this bears repeating.
July 14, 2006 5:34:04 PM

Quote:
If you check out NewEgg, they've got some nice free combo deals with AMD processors. I believe if you buy one of the FX series, you get a choice of 17" LCD, 1gb memory, motherboard, a 320gb hard drive or an mp3 player for free. They're trying to move those bad boys out before the Conroes come.



Wow, that's a deal. I need a new LCD.
July 14, 2006 5:38:37 PM

Quote:
Change the title to "Will a $50 AM2 5000+ be the chip to beat?" and you *might* have had a chance of taking away some interest from the imminent Core2Duo release. As it stands, you failed.
Synergy6



That's your opinion. system builders count. You don't. I replied because this is a free country and it was my post. I am confident then when someone tests with SLI the 5000+ will be a super hero at 1600. That's what matters not a res that no one would spend $300+ on a chip for. 1280 and up are the only worthwhile resolutions to test at. 5000+ was looking good.
July 14, 2006 5:45:55 PM

and u think that at 1280 res, the conroe chips will suck and the x2 5000 will beat everything?

brand loyalty is retarded, and dont giv that amd isnt an evil corporation, all corps want one thing, as much profit as possible, if u think otherwise ur a moron

intel now comes out with something that beats amd, amd later comes out with something that beats intel...........this will keep going, why the hell are u ppl getting so worked up
July 14, 2006 5:48:42 PM

Quote:
The 5000+ will not be $500.
Time and time again I tell you people and you just dont listen.
Amd will still hold the price/performance advantage when conroe comes out, that is their strategy. That has been there strategy for 10 years.
You get what you pay for no matter what brand you buy.
If a Core duo 2.6 costs say $400 and it competes or surpasses fx-62 in performance, then fx-62 will be priced at $350, thats the way it works people. You cannot sell an inferior item for more money.
Stop smoking crack!!!They should have registered forum residents submit a drug test before they can begin posting, and one every month following that. Many would fail. :o 

When it happens and your proven wrong once agan, can I bitch slap you?
AMD will still win the price/performance game. That has been amd's strategy for 10 years. Bet on it.
Why would anyone want to buy amd? Ummm...because Im going to get the same/better performance per dollar as I will with an intel processor. I'll try to be easy on you when you get smacked down, K?What's wrong? Sore that you can't use the "It doesn't exist yet" arguement anymore? Give it up MrsDumb fanboy/girl. AMD is getting owned, and there's nothing you can do about it except try and convince everyone that AMD will lower the FX prices to below cost to compete. What are you gonna say once that doesn't happen. Intels cheating...it's a new achitecture, has more cache, is 65nm, wait for K8L, wait for 4x4, wait for RHT, wait for K10, wait for the second coming of christ? You look up "sh*t for brains" in the dictionary, and there is a pic of you, holding a pic of Hector Ruiz, who's holding a pic of Sharikou, who's holding a pic of MMM, who's holding a pic of BM, who's holding a pic of 9inch. No definition needed. The picture tells the story. 8O
July 14, 2006 5:49:05 PM

Quote:
The 5000+ will not be $500.
Time and time again I tell you people and you just dont listen.
Amd will still hold the price/performance advantage when conroe comes out, that is their strategy. That has been there strategy for 10 years.
You get what you pay for no matter what brand you buy.
If a Core duo 2.6 costs say $400 and it competes or surpasses fx-62 in performance, then fx-62 will be priced at $350, thats the way it works people. You cannot sell an inferior item for more money.
Stop smoking crack!!!They should have registered forum residents submit a drug test before they can begin posting, and one every month following that. Many would fail. :o 

When it happens and your proven wrong once agan, can I bitch slap you?
AMD will still win the price/performance game. That has been amd's strategy for 10 years. Bet on it.
Why would anyone want to buy amd? Ummm...because Im going to get the same/better performance per dollar as I will with an intel processor. I'll try to be easy on you when you get smacked down, K?

One would have to be delusional to believe the fx-62 will be priced at $350. Even the fx-55 is around $600 still. Just think logically for one second what a $350 fx-62 would do to AMD's pricing structure. $50 x2 3800s?
July 14, 2006 5:56:26 PM

Quote:
One would have to be delusional to believe the fx-62 will be priced at $350. Even the fx-55 is around $600 still. Just think logically for one second what a $350 fx-62 would do to AMD's pricing structure. $50 x2 3800s?

Yeah but, logically thinking, what good would be for AMD a 1000$ enthusiast CPU collecting dust on the shelves due to lack of enthusiasts' interest?
Please dont say that AMD fanboys would buy it anyway, cause most of them only dream about such CPUs, and they buy x2 3800 instead...
If AMD can't price the FX CPUs competitively, then it should recall them from the market, completely.
Same goes for the x2 3800.
The situation for Intel is different, since they can leverage their market position and contracts with OEMs and big retail chains to get rid of the worthless PentiumDs..
July 14, 2006 6:07:46 PM

Quote:

That's your opinion. system builders count. You don't. I replied because this is a free country and it was my post. I am confident then when someone tests with SLI the 5000+ will be a super hero at 1600. That's what matters not a res that no one would spend $300+ on a chip for. 1280 and up are the only worthwhile resolutions to test at. 5000+ was looking good.


Yes. Because a chip, on performance/$ basis, getting walloped into the sand by the E6600 (don't even get me started on overclocking) is suddenly going to be the "chip to beat" at a different resolution. Riiiight. Some people can't accept that now is a really moronic time to be "bigging up" current AMD processors. Just concentrate on servers and the future, you know it's for the best.
Synergy6
a c 99 à CPUs
July 14, 2006 6:11:49 PM

Shoot, I could hook up a 939 A64 3000+ with that 7950 GX2 and have it come within a few FPS of a 5 GHz Conroe on LN2 at 1600x1200 or better. At those resolutions, the CPU doesn't mean all that much- it just needs to be "enough" to feed the GPU and everything over that is not really even seen. For gamers, any modern CPU will be good enough- spend your $$$ on a better GPU. It's only people who do computation-heavy work that CPU speed matters much for.
!