Help: Choose AM2 AMD CPU?

[leesiulung]

So I'm a budget consious user and looking for a cheap upgrade from X2 3800+ AM2. Idea is to re-use the X2 3800+ for a HTPC. However, there are so many chips to choose from in the same price range of $50-80.

I compiled the list below in order of what I think is the fastest CPU starting at the top.

SO which CPU would you recommend if I need virtualization support? I prefer a quiet running computer over a slightly faster one. I have an NForce 590 motherboard and do not plan to overclock.

X2 6000+ 3.1GHZ 89W, $76 + Free Webcam
X2 5600+ 2.9GHz 65W, $69
X2 5200+ 2.7GHz 65W, $63 + Free Game
X2 5050e 2.6GHz 45W, $63 + Free Game
X2 5000+ 2.6GHz 65W, $56
X2 4850 2.5GHz 45W, $57

Also, would an AM2+ CPU work on my NForce 590 motherboard?

Help would be much appreciated!

 

[Andrew1990]

I would recommend a windsor core with 1mb of cache per core such as the old 6000+ or 6400+, if you pick up a Brisbane core, I would go for one of the 45w such as the X2 4850 or 5050e.

AM2+ support would depend on your board and bios.

 

[leesiulung]

Which of these two X2 6000+ should I pick?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819103773

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16819103272

The second one seems to run at a higher GHz.

Why would I want a brisbane over a windsor? Speed isn't as important for me.... noise is.

 

[error8]

What do you want to use your computer for, if speed is not important? You say that the 3800+ goes into a HTPC, so your upgrade rig is used for what? Surfing the web and listening to mp3s? If that's the case, then just get the cheapest you can find.

Out of those two 6000+ cpus, the 125 W chip is faster, since it has 2 mb of level 2 cache. The other one is not that far behind, since it compensates with a higher frequency. If it was me, I wouldn't buy any of them. I'd get a 5000+ and overclock the hell out of it. You already have a good overclocking board. But you don't like overclocking, so...

 

[garritynet]

I had the same question about the two 6000+ X2s you are asking about. If you do a google search you will find that lots of people have had the same question. To answer your question the way mine was answered: They are both called the 6000+ is because they perform the same. It dose not matter one bit which one you get.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: garritynet
I had the same question about the two 6000+ X2s you are asking about. If you do a google search you will find that lots of people have had the same question. To answer your question the way mine was answered: They are both called the 6000+ is because they perform the same. It dose not matter one bit which one you get.

The 125W, has a slight edge in performance, in some situations, due to the higher amount of cache, even though it is 100 mhz slower then the brisbane core. But I think that this mostly isn't an important gain and they are as close as possible .

There is this benchmark here : http://www.anandtech.com/video...itesize=yes&i=3122&p=2 where the difference between the 5000+ and 5600+ is quite a big one, even though there is only 200mhz difference between them, but one has double the L2 cache.

 

[Tempered81]

I would get whichever has the highest overclocking potential, because in the end that one is the fastest.

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: jaredpace
I would get whichever has the highest overclocking potential, because in the end that one is the fastest.

Yeah, but he doesn't plan to overclock.

 

[Vee]

X2 5600, 65W

 

[Gikaseixas]

X2 6000+ is only 7 dollars more than X2 5600+ and comes with a free webcam, easy one

 

[Bateluer]

I've been considering pickup up two Brisbane 5200 to 5600s for my test bed systems. The 5600 is the most their motherboards will support.

I'd also personally go with the Brisbane core over the older Windsor cores because of the reduced power usage, most likely the 5200 to 5600 range myself.

 

[leesiulung]

Originally posted by: error8
What do you want to use your computer for, if speed is not important? You say that the 3800+ goes into a HTPC, so your upgrade rig is used for what? Surfing the web and listening to mp3s? If that's the case, then just get the cheapest you can find.

I use my computer mainly for programming (compiling code) and virtualiziation systems (I usually have a few of them running). The upgrading rig currently has 2x GeForce 7600GS in SLI (disabled, I think) driving 3 monitors. My guess is the speed differential of either part will not significantly affect me, but I'm kind of leaning towards the 2x 1MB cache chip but afraid of the extra noise it will generate with the stock fan.

Originally posted by: error8
Out of those two 6000+ cpus, the 125 W chip is faster, since it has 2 mb of level 2 cache. The other one is not that far behind, since it compensates with a higher frequency. If it was me, I wouldn't buy any of them. I'd get a 5000+ and overclock the hell out of it. You already have a good overclocking board. But you don't like overclocking, so...

Overclocking is something I will do once the system gets older and about to be replaced as the main computer. However, overclocking it might make an unstable system, which isn't worth it to me. Besides the cost versus time factor also makes it less appealing when I don't know too much about it in the first place.

 

[daveybrat]

Definitely go with the 6000+ 3.1GHz brisbane core. 89Watts compared to 125Watts is a big difference and the 3.1GHz version should run much cooler than the Windsor 3GHz version.

 

[Andrew1990]

I do believe they came out with a 6000+ Windsor 89w processor, you just have to look for it. Should be about the same $$ as well.

In all honestly though, I went from a 6000+ to my 3800+ overclocked and I didnt notice much of a decrease in performance. You might want to go for a low power X2 such as a 4850e or 5050e.

 

[lucasautomacao]

Totally agree with the upper post... pick an Energy Efficient CPU and slightly overclock it; you'd easily achieve the 6000+'s clock with either the 4850e or the 5050e...
It's quite likely that the manufacturer has released a AM2+ CPU support BIOS for your former Top Line n590 Mobo, check the website...

 

[Denithor]

4850e or 5050e for sure. 45W means quiet heatsink/fan and lower power bill, saving you cash over the long term. Add to that they are nearly as fast as any of the other dual core chips and it's a no brainer...

 

[Sureshot324]

AFIAK those wattage ratings are for when the CPU is running at 100%. At idle the power usage would be much closer. I'd go with the 6000 since it's only $19 more expensive then the cheapest you listed.

 

[formulav8]

If I remember correctly the 6000+ series (Both brisbane and windsor) should come with a very nice Copper/Hybrid heatpipe cooler. That cooler should be able to handle some ocing as well.


Jason

 

[Gikaseixas]

if you overclock a 4850e to match a 6000+ it will no longer consume only 45w so just get the 6000+, it's just 89w

 

[garritynet]

I have the 89watt Brisbane 6000+.

The stock cooler is nice with all the heatpipes but loud. I use this one. It goes down to 11.99 from time to time. Not a great aftermarket cooler by any means. Only a few degrees cooler than stock but much quieter in my opinion.

It did not overclock worth a damn. I just run it stock.