6000+ or 5000 black?

Do you already have an AM2 board? Which one?

I dont have a board yet, thinking the M3A.

As for the cache, thats a good point but again, if i tweak the multipliers AND the board can i get faster, irrespective of cache, than a 6000? Also how much overclocking can you do on a 6000?

Thanks for replies
-G

My 6000 only over clocks on air to 3.2 stable. But Im very happy with it having it 6 months now. The new phenoms dont impress me much either so Im sticking with it for a while longer. I think the cache does make a difference as well. But overall you need a good balance throughout your system even with Oc.

I'm running a 5000+ BE right now @ 3.23 Ghz. FSB is 202 and multi is 16. Stable and fast, but does have less cache than a 6000+ BE. So a 6000 is going to be a bit faster at the same speed.

So why do people get a 5000BE if at the same speed the 6000 is a bit faster because of the cache? Surely any advantage the 5000 has given 45nm pins is lost when overclocking? (in terms of power use/heat)

Intel doesnt come into the equation for me =)

I think the 6000 and 5000 are decent upgrades for current AM2 users, but the e4000 series smokes them and ends up being cheaper. I got an e4600, P35-DS3, and AC7 for under $250

E2160 faster then the 5000 BE over clocked to 3.23 or even the 6000+ not over clocked.................UMMM NO.

LOL read toms hardware review of the 5000+ BE please. The 5000+BE, which I currently have running at 3.23 GHZ with no FSB adjustment, the multiplier is at 16 and the core voltage is .1 up from stock and it runs ROCK SOLID, is compared to an E6550 and comes very close to it. In some test beats it right out. The E2160 can't even touch the 5000+ BE at 3.23 GHZ. Also note that the 5000+ BE doesn't come with a cooler as you noted, but the stock cooler from my Athlon 64 FX-55 fit perfectly on my 5000+BE and cools it great so if you currently have at least a socket 939 processor you will not have to worry about purchasing a new cooler for your 5000+ BE. In the noted review on Toms hardware he clearly shows that the 5000+BE clocked at 3.10 is within -2.5% of the E6550 which spanks the E2160 badly.

As for the original question, which processor to select the 6000+ or 5000+BE. I chose the 5000+BE over the 6000+ solely based on price. The 5000+ BE I got for 115.00 and the 6000+ is still 159.00 or above. As noted in the review the difference between the two when over clocking the 5000+BE, which is the point, is minimal and in some cases the 5000+BE beats it.

My specs

ASUS M2N-E
ADATA Vitesta 5-5-5-18 2 GIG DDR2800
Raptor 150 GIG
MSI 8800GT 512
AMD 5000+ BE overclocked 3.23GHZ
Kingwin KT424 black alluminum Case

Can't you guys just respect the wish of the user? He asks 5000+ or 6000+. 1 person tells him intel (that's fine, he didn't say any dislike for the intel systems until then), he clearly tells us NO INTEL. That should be the end. Some people rather take an AMD, let them.

And for cache. For an intel processor I hear it's making more difference then the AMD with it's onboard mem controller. So I would say get the 5000+. It's easy to overclock, you don't need an expansive cooler like everyone is saying, getting the arctic 64 pro should be enough (other places I hear stories about great performance with this cooler).

Either one will be fine. I'm getting the 5000+ one of the am2+ boards too. Getting ready for the next batch of phenoms/tolli's/duals and still get a nice upgrade for a nice price.

Also people should be fair. They complain about stock coolers knowing they will buy a different cooler, but bash the price based on the lack of cooler.

Hey, I respect...I am an AMD guy all the way, I have stuck with them this far and I will continue to do so as long as I can get nice deals like the 5000+ BE. Fact is I weighed very heavily the option of the Core 2 Duo E6750 vs the 6000+ and it still remains that I can get the AMD solution for less money specially when you consider getting a decent AMD motherboard for 30-50 dollars less then a decent Intel board. Again, I finally went with the 5000+ BE over the 6000+ because when they made it available it was a no brainer for me.

It wasn't directed at you. You just explained something and then in your conclusion considered the OP's request, the best between the 2 AMD's.

I was talking about Dirty Barry. There are people always doing there get a Intel because it always beats an AMD.

You can check out this review that discusses the OC'ing of the Intel CPU's, if you like.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipse [...] =3112&p=14
and also on this site they reviewed a e2160 at 3.2ghz, which was faster than a stock e6750! You can see for yourself.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/0 [...] benchmarks


Now I know that you want the AMD, which I totally understand why. So as I stated before, I'd go with the 5000+ BE.

Well like i said where i live the 5000 BE and 6000 are the same price. I understand the power usage and cooling differences but i also read the 5000 has G2 stepping, can someone explain what that is and if it would counter the cache difference at all? Also how fast can i get the 6000 on air?

It is not as clear cut as you would think. I mean I feel I have a pretty good bang for the buck system. I paid $100 for the mobo, $165 for the processor, and $15 for the CPU cooler so that was a total of $280 for that part. Im not sure what you paid for your system, but I am willing to bet that yours was somewhere close to $250 as I dont know what cooler you have, but considering I paid ~12% more for my setup than what a typical setup I would believe it would take to get the 5000+BE to 3.23ghz. I would take my 12% more cost for the extra 20 - 30% performance and I was not worried about hitting 3.2ghz on my processor before I bought it as I knew that I had about a 90% chance of it happening pretty easy. Whereas I was worried about even hitting 2.6ghz on my old AMD 3800+, which I was not able to achieve without really high voltages and temps so I could not leave set for regular use.

So in essence my rant is that I suppose yes in most cases the AMD way to go will give you marginally higher "bang for your buck", but it is not as clear is you make it sound. Though I agree AMD does still need our money...that is why I will be getting a 3870 when I can find one lol.

Best,

3Ball

You guys still havent answered my question =)

Well i dont have fantastic airflow, the case is in a poor spot but i can fix that. But youre saying that ill definiately get more power out of a 6000 than a 5000 BE?

Is it difficult to o/c a 6000? I mean i know its harder than the BE but...

Missing link found in Georgia.......go figure...............

I definitely agree! If you can get the 6000+ for the same price...or even slightly more it should be an easy decision to go with that. As far as the OC goes. I could only get 200mhz out of mine, but it isnt the most stable and it runs hot, but I have it in a somewhat small mid tower atx case. I dont really use the comp, but my roommate does and he loves it. 3.2ghz is somewhat of a wall of the arch. The people who get higher than that are lucky imo. None the less the performance difference will be very small.

Best,

3Ball

Well, I just went from a 3600+ @ 2.9Ghz to an E4600 at 3.5Ghz (3.3 daily) and it really is just no comparison. The 3600+ was a great chip for the price, but it really has nothing on my new CPU!

It's almost the standard on Intel.

My Q6600 sits at 3.6 GHz 24/7 and I can bench up to 3.8 on air.

Look... I just built my new rig with the Gigabyte 790fx MB. I planted a 6400 on it and at near 100% on both cores in prime 95 It has yet to go over 39c with a 110mm Zalman cooler. I dont care what anyone says about the 5000. You will have to raise voltage. You will shorten the life of your MB. You end up with a host of problems all around in alot of cases. The 6000 or 6400 is the only logical choices.

Think of it like this.. If you tow a 2 ton trailer to work every day you need a truck to pull it. If you buy a Celica and slap a hitch on it chances are it wont move and it will break constantly. Buy the right gear for the task at hand. OCing should never be the first thing you do. OC a rig when it is no longer up to par or just buy the right tools for the job.

That is one of the worst comparisons I've ever heard.

Just because I want to.. how about this.

I'm going to buy a 5000+ BE, OC it past your 6400+, beat you in some benchmarks. Then buy myself some dinner with the money I saved.

*THEN* when the 5000+ BE fails in 4-5 years because it was OC'd with a slight increase in voltage I will feel bad because your 6400+ will still be chugging along for another 2-3 years after mine fails.

Or I'd just buy another rig in 2 years because it will probably be needed.

Since Intel raised their specs on all processors to 0.85-1.5v I think we're in the clear.. I guess some people just have that stigma that OCing = death of equipment.

Edit: And I do know some really dumb people that think that.. but it's because they're friends tell them anecdotal stories about their friends friend who upped vCore by .001 volt and it blew up his processor. Or because they had a friend OC their stuff that was retarded and ran things too hot thus shortening the life of the processor..

Seriously though, as long as heat is kept in check, it'll be a while before electromitigation sets in.

My CPU was only $130 and reaches 3.5Ghz with a $12 cooler. SO $142 for a CPU the 5000+ has no dreams of competing with.

ALSO, my $60 3600+ went to 2.9Ghz with an ACFreezer 64, so is 300 more Mhz worth $100? The 5000+ BE is not this god of a cpu you are making it out to be. It is good, but now GREAT!