AMD X2 5200 VS E6600

Status
Not open for further replies.
E6600 is:
1. faster for everything
2. more energy efficient
3. overclcoks much more
4. dissipates less heat
than X2 5200+!

Get E6600.
 
I've Checked Tom's CPU charts and have concluded that there is Virtually NO DIFFERENCE in between the two processors at stock speeds. They seem to Tie each other in almost every single bench mark and beat each other only in about 4-6 Bench Intel and about 4-6 bench AMD. So concluded that you may go for either one of These processors and at stock speed they will perform EXACTLY the SAME

*Used the FX-62 On Toms Charts Because X2 5200 and FX-62(with unlocked Multiplier) is exactly the CPU.
 
E6600 is:
1. faster for everything
2. more energy efficient
3. overclcoks much more
4. dissipates less heat
than X2 5200+!

Get E6600.

Well for #1 Your COMPLETELY WRONG Is NOT Faster* in every thing These processors are EXACTLY the Same in Virtually All benchmarks. While the #2,#3,#4 Also have a good Point, but besides that they are EXACTLY The SAME*

*I've Used the FX-62 as reference, because I've found no difference in the 2 Processors in most benchmarks, so you can use either CPU Interchangeably.
 
I've Checked Tom's CPU charts and have concluded that there is Virtually NO DIFFERENCE in between the two processors at stock speeds. They seem to Tie each other in almost every single bench mark and beat each other only in about 4-6 Bench Intel and about 4-6 bench AMD. So concluded that you may go for either one of These processors and at stock speed they will perform EXACTLY the SAME

Utter rubbish. I don't know what charts you're looking at since Toms doesn't even have an X2 5200+ in the charts!!!. The highest X2 is the 5000+.

Edit - I see you compared it using the FX-62. These two are not the same!. The X2 5200+ runs at 2.6GHz, the FX-62 runs at 2.8GHz.

Here is a price/performance comparison between an E6600 and X2 5000+:

432-465-195.png


Clearly the E6600 is the better choice.
 
I've Checked Tom's CPU charts and have concluded that there is Virtually NO DIFFERENCE in between the two processors at stock speeds. They seem to Tie each other in almost every single bench mark and beat each other only in about 4-6 Bench Intel and about 4-6 bench AMD. So concluded that you may go for either one of These processors and at stock speed they will perform EXACTLY the SAME

Utter rubbish. I don't know what charts you're looking at since Toms doesn't even have an X2 5200+ in the charts!!!. The highest X2 is the 5000+.

Here is a price/performance comparison between an E6600 and X2 5000+:

432-465-195.png


Clearly the E6600 is the better choice. I


Still_Life:
I can get them both at the same price

And Read my *In my 2nd Post The 5200 and the FX-62 Are exactly the same Chip :roll:
 
I've Checked Tom's CPU charts and have concluded that there is Virtually NO DIFFERENCE in between the two processors at stock speeds. They seem to Tie each other in almost every single bench mark and beat each other only in about 4-6 Bench Intel and about 4-6 bench AMD. So concluded that you may go for either one of These processors and at stock speed they will perform EXACTLY the SAME

Utter rubbish. I don't know what charts you're looking at since Toms doesn't even have an X2 5200+ in the charts!!!. The highest X2 is the 5000+.

Here is a price/performance comparison between an E6600 and X2 5000+:

432-465-195.png


Clearly the E6600 is the better choice. I


Still_Life:
I can get them both at the same price

And Read my *In my 2nd Post The 5200 and the FX-62 Are exactly the same Chip :roll:

Err... no they're not. The X2 5200+ runs at 2.6GHz, the FX-62 runs at 2.8GHz. Besides, even an FX-62 is slower than an E6600 overall, so quit while you're behind without further embarassing yourself.

DELETED I hate arguing with n00bs. :roll:
 
I've Checked Tom's CPU charts and have concluded that there is Virtually NO DIFFERENCE in between the two processors at stock speeds. They seem to Tie each other in almost every single bench mark and beat each other only in about 4-6 Bench Intel and about 4-6 bench AMD. So concluded that you may go for either one of These processors and at stock speed they will perform EXACTLY the SAME

Utter rubbish. I don't know what charts you're looking at since Toms doesn't even have an X2 5200+ in the charts!!!. The highest X2 is the 5000+.

Here is a price/performance comparison between an E6600 and X2 5000+:

432-465-195.png


Clearly the E6600 is the better choice. I


Still_Life:
I can get them both at the same price

And Read my *In my 2nd Post The 5200 and the FX-62 Are exactly the same Chip :roll:

Err... no they're not. The X2 5200+ runs at 2.6GHz, the FX-62 runs at 2.8GHz. Besides, even an FX-62 is slower than an E6600 overall, so quit while you're behind without further embarassing yourself.

**** I hate arguing with n00bs. :roll:

Okay i guess i was off with the GHz, i for A second though they were equally clocked but that was the Athlon x2 5400(not the 5200) Okay then the

E6600 Is clearly the better choice
 
Well for #1 Your COMPLETELY WRONG Is NOT Faster* in every thing These processors are EXACTLY the Same in Virtually All benchmarks. While the #2,#3,#4 Also have a good Point, but besides that they are EXACTLY The SAME*

*I've Used the FX-62 as reference, because I've found no difference in the 2 Processors in most benchmarks, so you can use either CPU Interchangeably.
I think you've allready figured out that E6600 outperfroms X2 5200+ in everything except in one synthetic benchmark, ScienceMark.
 
Epsilon_clueless, The graph you posted yourself says that the 5000+ is a BETTER buy than the E6600. Just read the bottom of your graph "less is better." (If you are going to have attitude, you should get your facts straight.
 
Get the 65nm version of the 5000 x2 and then you have a much better abng for buck CPU then the e6600 in almost every way. And performs around the same as the e6400.

Much cheaper though.
 
1. Why not get an E6550?
2. The Athlon is cheaper because it requires a cheaper motherboard. (No northbridge.) This is a hidden cost.
3. The intel core2 cpus overclock VERY easily, so much so that it is better to buy a Gigabyte P35-DS3R for $129 and then buy a E4300 and overclock it. (Total = $250) You will end up with a better performer than either, plus a quality motherboard that should last a long time! It is better to go this route than to say spend $70 on a mobo + $200 on an E6600 to get only a questionable overclock.
4. Best yet, you could go this route and get X2-5200 performance (through OC) at a really good price:
Processor ($65)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103068
Motherboa rd: ($80)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813138081
 
Are you SURE you can get them both at the same price? From what I can tell the E6600 is considerably more expensive. Now I'm not saying you should get the AMD... just questioning your pricing methodology.
 


Benchmarks I have seen show a 6000+ X2 to be nearly as fast as a E6600. E6600 is the better CPU, but a 6000+ X2 with a cheap AM2 motherboard is a cost effective solution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.