AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 Vs. Intel Extreme Edition 965
In practical applications, the FX-62 almost did as well as Intel's fastest CPU, the Extreme Edition 965. In our benchmark series, AMD's Athlon 64 FX-62 beat the Intel processor in just a single application. In this discipline, three multitasking benchmarks went to AMD's credit and just one to Intel. The reason for this transformation is the DDR2 memory interface on the new platform, which allows DDR2 to play out it strengths to the fullest.
In the games department, it's 4:1 for the FX processor, clearly making it the best available gamer CPU on the market.
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+ Vs. Intel Pentium D 950
We compared the Athlon 64 X2 4000+ with the Intel Pentium D 950, since these CPUs cost the same in the stores and the former is the cheapest dual-core CPU from AMD. Can AMD and its cut-price CPU stand up to the performance of the Intel Pentium D 950?
The smallest dual-core CPU from AMD costs a mere $30 less than the 4000+ in the stores.
Price performance ratio in all benchmarks we applied
This results clearly show that Intel is currently a better value for money when it comes to processors. The main reasons for this sudden reversal are price cuts by Intel, and the loss of speed resulting from the introduction of DDR2.
Current page: AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 Vs. Intel Extreme Edition 965Prev Page Synthetic Benchmarks, Continued Next Page Conclusion: Good Energy Efficiency, But A Bad Value For Money
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
Tom's Hardware's dedicated news crew consists of both freelancers and staff with decades of experience reporting on the latest developments in CPUs, GPUs, super computing, Raspberry Pis and more.