Amd athlon 64 x2 5000+ BE vs 6000+

Oh and by the way can it work on asus m2n motherboard?

both will work and the x2 6000 is the better of two

but your mobo supports better CPUs

Thanks for reply. But are you sure about mobo? Here's a link: http://www.obazaar.com/green-nforce-socket-audio-gigabi...

as usual the crappy asus web site is impossible to navigate

here is your CPU support list, takes about half an hour to load right now
http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=74PPQIiEejvuIiHv

your mobo supports up to the x2 6400 125w and 89w versions

Depends on the CPU. If you're talking about the Windsor model then go with the Windsor 6000+ and overclock it, especially if it's the 89W version (assuming your board takes it). If you're looking at the Brisbane 6000+ then go with the 5000+
BE since you should be able to hit 3.1GHz easily enough and you should go a bit farther with a good CPU cooler.

This should be obvious? If left in stock form the 6000+ will be faster. As a BE chip however the 5000+ should be easy to OC to 6000+ speeds, so the difference is then little. Buy whichever is cheaper?

having owned three athlon X2 including the Windsor 6000, it really does not make a major difference. None of those CPU where all that great and their heyday has long since passed.

Clock for clock the Windsor chips are faster than the Brisbane chips. That's why the 6000+ Brisbane chip is clocked at 3.1Ghz while the Windsor chip is clocked at 3.0GHz. Also, late Windsor chips hit a higher clock speed than their Brisbane brothers. That's why the 6400+ Black Edition was a Windsor chip even though they were also producing Brisbane chips at the time.

It was slightly more then that. Digging deep in the brain I think the L2 Cache access time was roughly have the number of cycles compared to the Brisbane chips. AMD claimed that was so they could increase the size of the L2 cache if they needed to, but they never did so who knows. (possible I'm confused and this was a different chip, but I'm pretty certain I'm right.)

I would try to stay away from using either of these chips at this point in time. Just not worth it to bother with these chips in most cases.

But to the person that said these chips where not great. That is kinda correct depending on how you look at. But I do not look at it that way. I look at it as K8 as a whole. Until conroe came out from Intel the x2's where the best chips on the market. They where great and people where paying A LOT of money for them.

Because those two options are terrible. The OP did not rule out a new motherboard. All you he asked about was the chips, then if people are sure they will work in his board. Do not give me this part of the question bs either. None of your different core/revisions/overclocking are part of the very OP simply question.


He can stay away from them very simply. Do not buy either one of them. It is a flat out waste of money to toss to get either one of them. Do not spend a single cent on upgrading your system with that motherboard in it.

And again back to this part of question nonsense. By that logic EVERYTHING after the first reply ct1615 is a waste. He answered the simple question perfectly. He said both will work and the 6000 is better. All questions answered. End of thread right there. Attention to detail dude.

Well it seems it should be better for me to get a whole new system not to upgrade this one then...

I owned and sold a lot of those chips a while back.

Sounds like a tight budget and you did not say exactly what you are running so here goes.



If you have an Athlon 64, or Sempron... any single core chip then you will see a HUGE difference going to dual core.

5200 to 6000+ or whatever core will all be pretty good. some are better then others but not by much.

If you have anything better then an Athlon X2 4400... it is not worth the upgrade.

If you have 1 gig of ram, add another.


If your videocard is less a geforce 7300gt, 8400gs, radeon 1300 or similar,

Get a Radeon 4650 or 4670 and this will still manage to play games such as Company of Heroes, Starcraft2 even Crysis will be playable and look alright.



(eddited)
Would be best for you to give as much details as you can as no one knows what you really need...

For example, an athlon X2 5200 with 2gigs ram + a radeon 4650 can run a lot of games fairly well.
A friend of mine is still on my old old 939pin Athlon 3800X2 with 2gigs DDR400 + Geforce8500GT and he is more then satisfied... playing company of heroes and starcraft2

So if you balance out your system, you can milk it another year. (assuming you have XP as vista/7 need more ram)

Well im much into rpgs like oblivion, gothic 3 or risen and i would like to play them on max quality oh and btw i would like to try out dragon age origins too on max or med quality. Because of that dragon age origins i think it would be best to buy a new system because it would be good for upcoming games.

Dragon Age Origins also loves quad core processors and will struggle on an Athlon X2 in comparison.

its an single player RPG, 30+ FPS is fine for it. you can max it out with an athlon X 2 6000 + 9800GT