AMD 6000+ AM2 X2 Processor

Admin - 2007-08-14 21:50:39 in CPU's
Category: CPU's
Reviewed by: Admin   
Reviewed on: August 20, 2007
Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices
Provided by: AMD
Price: $169.99

Introduction:

Everyone wants to be first, whether it's land on the moon, win a race or introduce a new technology that corners the market and brings about a change on how we use things for the next ten years. Although being first has its benefits and could actually propel you into the limelight, it could also be a hindrance. Your technology could be so far ahead of the others that other technologies take years being updated and your ground breaking accomplishment can only be used at half its total potential.

AMD (Advanced Micro Devices) was the first to produce a processor that had a 64 bit architecture. This is the next step in the evolution of CPUs taking over from the 32 bit processors we have come accustomed to for over ten years. There has only been one problem since its release over two years ago... other technologies have not caught up (being mainstream operating systems and other hardware). However, Microsoft released a 64 bit version of XP in 2005 and subsequently had so many problems getting software drivers for other hardware most people who used it reverted back to the 32 bit version of XP shortly after purchasing it. Now we have Vista, which gives you the option to use it as a 32 bit or 64 bit operating system and still there are incompatibility issues with drivers and hardware not working correctly in the 64 bit environment. Myself along with many other enthusiasts are starting to compare Vista to Windows Millennium, which to date, is one of the worst operating systems Microsoft has ever produced. (Due to the lack of software drivers for hardware support and the Millennium kernel being unstable)

Where AMD was once the front runner in 64 bit technology it now has competition. Intel entered the 64 bit market first with the Pentium 4 and D now the Core 2 Duo. Intel spent more time releasing a 64 bit processor and many say that their version is either comparable or better. Can this really be proven when we are still waiting for hardware and software to catch up with an over two year old technology?

AMD now produces a 64 bit mainstream processor which has broken the 3.0 GHZ barrier; it is the Athlon 64 6000+ X2 AM2. This chip contains 940 pins, 2000 MHz Hyper-Transport, 128 x 128 L1 cache and an L2 cache of 2 X 1 MB on a 90 nm platform. The 6000 + will be the focus of this review.

“Over the course of AMD's three decades in business, silicon and software have become the steel and plastic of the worldwide digital economy. Technology companies have become global pacesetters, making technical advances at a prodigious rate — always driving the industry to deliver more and more, faster and faster.”

“However, “technology for technology's sake” is not the way AMD does business. AMDs history is marked by a commitment to innovation that's truly useful for customers — putting the real needs of people ahead of technical one-upmanship. AMD founder Jerry Sanders has always maintained that “customers should come first, at every stage of a company's activities.” AMDs current CEO, Hector de Jesus Ruiz, continues to carry the torch, saying, “Customer-centric innovation is the pre-eminent value at AMD. It is our reason for being and our strategy for success.””

 

Closer Look:

AMD 6000+ AM2 X2 Processor

 

Installation:

Installation of the AMD 6000+ AM2 X2 processor is no different than other AMD processors if you are familiar with them. There are 940 pins which if positioned correctly attach directly into the motherboards attachment. After locking the processor in you will need to choose which type of cooling you will use. I chose a liquid cooling solution for this project.

 

 

 

 

After attaching the waterblock and inserting the ram, screw the motherboard onto the case.

 

Attach all your hoses and check for leaks.

 

Replace your side panel plug in all your peripherals and turn the system on.

Specifications:

CPU Socket Type
Socket AM2
Core

Windsor Multi-Core
Dual-Core Name
Athlon 64 X2 6000+
Operating Frequency
3.0GHz
HT
2000MHz
L1 Cache
128KB+128KB
L2 Cache
2 x 1MB
Manufacturing Tech
90 nm
64 bit Support
Yes

Hyper-Transport Support
Yes

Virtualization Technology Support
Yes

Multimedia Instruction
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, 3DNOW! Professional
Voltage
1.35-1.4V
Cooling Device
Heatsink and Fan included (Retail)

Manufacturer Warranty
 
Parts
3 years limited
Labor
3 years limited

Testing:

I will be using the OverclockersClub benchmarking suite to show what kind of performance the 6000+ delivers. The benchmarking suite we will use includes both system tests, as well as gaming benchmarks. For a comparison , I will be using this processor against other processors by AMD, as well as Intel. All stock clock speeds will be run at default specs to eliminate any variables. All video card settings were left at setup defaults, also to eliminate any variables.

 

Testing Setup:

Comparison System:

 

The system tests we will be using are listed below:

We will start with Apophysis. This program is used primarily to render and generate fractal flame images. We will run this benchmark with the following settings:

The measurement used is time to render, in minutes, to complete.

 

Lower is Better

 

WinRAR is a tool to archive and compress large files to a manageable size. We will use 10MB, 100MB and 500MB files and test the time needed to compress these files. Time will be measured in seconds.

 

 

 

 

I chose to compare the AMD 6000+ to two of Intels most popular CPU’s: the Core 2 Duo E6600 and E6700 since their performance levels are quite similar and their prices at the time of testing were the most comparable.

At stock speeds the AMD 6000+ kept up well, while the 5400+ was the weakest in rendering the OCC Flame. This can be due to the differences in onboard cache. Where the Intels have 4 MB shared onboard cache the AMDs have 2MB and 1MB. Both AMD chips are the clear winners in the WinRar file compression category.

Testing:

Specview is a benchmark designed to test OpenGL performance. The tests used for comparison are listed below. The default tests were chosen to be able to compare across platforms. In these tests, higher scores equate to better performance.

 

 

Higher is Better

 

Higher is Better

 

Higher is Better

 

Higher is Better

Testing:

PcMark05 is used to measure complete system performance. We will be running a series of tests to gauge the performance of each individual processor to see which, if any, rises above the others. 

 

 

 

 

Higher is Better

 

 

Higher is Better

 

 

Higher is Better

 

 

Higher is Better

 

Testing:

Sisoft Sandra is a diagnostic utility and synthetic benchmarking program. Sandra allows you to view your hardware at a higher level to be more helpful. For this benchmark, I will be running a broad spectrum of tests to gauge the performance of key areas of the motherboards.

 

 

 

 

Processor Arithmetic

 

 

Multi-Core Efficiency

 

 

Memory Bandwidth

 

 

Memory Latency

 

 

Cache and Memory

 

 

File System

 

Physical Disks

 

 

Power Management Efficiency

 

The two categories I was most interested in seeing were the multicore efficiency and cache/memory. Again these two tests have very much to do with the amount of onboard L2 cache, I was not surprised to see that the 6000+ did half as well in the cache and memory portion... but it truly did get smoked in mulitcore efficiency. One favorable benchmark was memory bandwidth, which makes sense because AMD CPUs have an onboard memory controller.

Testing:

Sciencemark tests real world performance instead of using synthetic benchmarks. For this test, we ran the benchmark suite and will use the overall score for comparison.

 

 

 

 

Higher is Better!

 

Cinebench is useful for testing your system, CPU and OpenGL capabilities using the software program CINEMA 4D. We will be using the default tests for this benchmark.

 

Higher is Better

 

HD Tune measures disk performance to make comparisons between drives or disk controllers.

 

Higher is Better

 

 

Lower is Better

Testing:

Now that the system benchmarks are complete, we will move on to the video benchmarking portion of the review. We will be using an assortment of games to test performance across different  processors to look for any performance advantages. The testing will start with resolutions at 800x600 and progressing to 1280x1024 to try and take the video card out of the equation and show the performance at resolutions where processor performance can influence the results. (EVGA 8800GTS 640mb used for Intel Processors)

 

The game tests that we use are as follows:

 

First up we have Far Cry. This game makes extensive use of pixel shaders and features Polybump Normal Mapping technology to increase character details.

 

We will be using the Hardware OC Benchmarking Utility version 1.8 with the following settings.

 

 

 

 

At lower resolutions, CPUs have more influence in overall performance than higher resolutions, but does a video card with more memory make a difference? Yes it does, when the two Intel processors were benchmarked with the 320MB video card, performance dropped between 7 to 22 frames a second depending on the resolution.

Testing:

F.E.A.R. is a newer game that includes its own benchmarking utility. We will be using this test to benchmark the game. This game introduces a new AI model that emulates real squad behavior. It has the ability to counteract the moves you make rather than having a predictable routine.

 

The settings we will use are below:

 

 

 

 

At 1280 X 1024 a CPU is about its max on influence in graphics performance and it is clear that the AMD 6000+ helped generate enough power and the lower memory 8800 GTS was able to overtake the higher.

Testing:

Quake 4 is next up for testing. We will be using the Hardware OC Quake 4 Benchmark Utility version 1.5 to complete the testing with this game. You will need to update to the most current version for the latest time demo and bug fixes. Average FPS (frames per second) will be the measure used.

 

The settings we will use are listed below:

 

 

 

 

 

Testing:

Call of Duty 2 is a WWII first-person shooter game that is dated, but still maintains a tremendous online following. This test will consist of a timed run on the Stalingrad multi-player map, measured by Average FPS (frames per second).

 

The settings used are listed below:

 

 

 

 

 

Testing:

Microsoft Flight Simulator X is the newest edition of the popular flight simulator. For testing, I will fly the same route through each resolution. Testing will start at a resolution of 1024X768 since this is the lowest resolution available in the game.

 

The settings we will use are listed below:

 

 

 

 

 

Testing:

Need For Speed: Most Wanted. For this test, we will time each race and record the average FPS (Frames Per Second) achieved.

 

The settings we will use are listed below.

 

 

 

 

 

Testing:

3DMark06 is one of the benchmarks that always comes up when a bragging contest begins. 3DMark06 presents a severe test for many of today's hardware components. Let's see how this set of processors perform. We will only be comparing the E6700, E6750 and AMD 6000+ for this series of benchmarks. The settings used are listed below.

 

Settings:

 

 

 

Because this review is all about the processor, we will be showing how the CPU scored in each of the resolutions we tested.

 

Testing:

RyderMark is a new benchmark developed by Candella Software. The benchmark illustrates a speed boat race through the famed canals of Venice, Italy. There are many options that can be changed in the benchmark; the settings we have settled on to complete this benchmark are listed below. We will be running this test with the E6700  Intel processor, as well as an AMD 6000+ for comparison. Please check back for a full review on this new benchmark.

 

 

 

 

 

Settings: