Help Choose My Processor

Hey everyone,

After obsessing on Newegg for a while, I've been trying to decide between the following processors for my new system:

1) AMD Athlon 64 X2 5800+ Brisbane 3.0GHz Socket AM2 2 x 512KB Cache 89W Dual-Core Processor (65nm) ($76)

2) AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ Windsor 3.0GHz Socket AM2 2 x 1MB L2 Cache 89W Dual-Core Processor (90nm) ($92)

One is 65nm, the other is 90, but the 90nm one has more L2 Cache. They say the Brisbane OC's better, but won't the 2MB L2 Cache outweigh Brisbane's 65nm architecture? Could someone help decide between the two? Is option 2 worth the extra $$$?

The rest of the system includes a Radeon 3850 HD graphics card and 4 gigs of ram and I am running vista 64bit....

Thanks for all the replies!

10 answers Last reply
More about help choose processor
  1. I'd get the second because of the larger cache. I'm not going to try to convince you to switch, but why didn't you go with intel?
  2. It was mostly $$/Ghz of performance. I am persuadable, however... is a 3.0 Ghz core 2 duo going to be as fast as a 3.0 Ghz Athlon Dual Core?
  3. almost forgot the Intel will kill the AMD at 3.0GHz
  4. dozer, but that only has 1MB of L2 Cache... I guess you could add that to the two (now three) choices, then....
  5. An e8400 will completely kill a 6000+.
  6. then there's the amd 6400 be at 3.2ghz/2m per core,no idea what it's limit is tho..the 5000+ be that i currently have is rated at 3.3 ghz max...i would probably need a better board for that....:)
  7. I guess the main question is, how would you rank the following in importance:

    - L2 Cache
    - 65nm vs. 90nm
    - 0.1 Ghz

  8. 1) L2 cache
    2) 65nm vs 90nm
    3) 0.1 ghz
  9. Look, seriously intel is much better
    It's not ghz/$$, becuase ghz doesn't translate into real world performance. In addition, intel overclocks much better. People consistently get 4ghz on the E8400, and sometimes up to 4.4ghz (where the E8400 starts at 3ghz). However with the AMD proccesors, you'll be like to get 3.6ghz.

    I suggest the E7200. It runs at 2.53ghz but will out perform either of the processors you linked, at stock speeds. However, keeping it at stock speeds is kind of a waste. You can overclock it easily to 3.6ghz+, no problem. Then it will blow those AMD processors away.

    Also, if you are going to rank, it's like this

    1) 65nm over 90nm
    2) L2 cache
    3) .1ghz

    This is because cache only matters on intel processors, not AMD becuse they the internal memory controller
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Cache Processors Dual Core Product