The Phenom vs. Athlon Core Shootout
Table of contents
- 1. Is Phenom Really Faster Than Athlon?
- 2. Phenom Models and Details
- 3. Phenom Models and Details, Continued
- 4. Test Components & Test Experience
- 5. AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ at 2.6 GHz
- 6. Asus M3A32-MVP with AMD790FX Chipset
- 7. Athlon 64 X2 vs. Phenom
- 8. Test Setup

AMD removed the core count suffix X2, X3 and X4 from the logo and changed its nomenclature instead: 9000 models have four cores, while the upcoming triple cores have a 7000 model number.
AMD has had a difficult year. Not only did the long anticipated Phenom processor arrive at considerably lower clock speeds than expected (2.3 GHz instead of 3 GHz), but the current stepping of the so-called Barcelona core is afflicted with a nasty bug. While there are workarounds for it, only an updated stepping will allow AMD to resume quad core processor deliveries in the server segment. The fact that the quad core doesn’t deliver sufficient performance to attack Intel at the high-end doesn’t help either. As a consequence of these problems, AMD has had to readjust its product strategy, and position the processor together with the new Spider platform in the mainstream. Despite all of the issues, though, Phenom isn’t as bad as it may appear, as our comparison between the Phenom and the Athlon 64 X2 shows.
In fact, AMD has a pretty significant advantage over Intel when it comes to upgrading existing systems with a quad core processor. While Intel has been quick with launching new platforms for each and every new processor generation due to modified requirements, AMD has not changed the specifications for Socket AM2 at all. As a consequence, it is technically possible to deploy a quad core Phenom processor into a Socket AM2 motherboard that has been running an Athlon 64 or Athlon 64 X2 - all you need is a BIOS update. This doesn’t work in every case - some motherboards may not be able to handle the Phenoms’ power requirements of 95 or 125 W - but most enthusiast motherboards can be upgraded from a single or dual core to a quad core processor easily.
The upgrade situation definitely requires some attention, as both AMD and Intel are roughly half a year away from the next significant technology update. AMD will introduce Socket AM3, which will bring with it DDR3 memory, while Intel’s next-generation Nehalem will finally integrate the memory controller with the processor. Knowing this, even the upcoming Core 2 Duo E8000 or Core 2 Quad Q9000 series have to be seen as interim products on the way to the next generation, despite the certainty that these will outperform the existing Core 2 products by roughly 10%.
Latest CPU News
- 10/02 – CPU Performance Boosted 20% When CPU, GPU Collaborate
- 10/02 – Leaked Slide Shows Intel Haswell Set for March-June 2013
- 09/02 – $100,000 If You Can Prove Quantum Computers Impossible
- 09/02 – AMD Adds FM1 CPUs Athlon II X4 638 and Athlon II X4 641
- 08/02 – Raspberry Pi Scheduled to Launch This Month
Interesting, but by only using one core it doesn't give a decent real world test
I'd have like to have seen a real 'upgrade' comparison, eg divx encoding on an x2 vs phenom to give me some idea if it's worth the money
not realy the Point of this test was to show how real world apps perform in Single threded apps
was hopeing anandtech did this but thay used Faster X2 amd chips so there was No point at all included them results unless thay had the same clocked chips as well
and thay have all ready done (or other sites have any way) done divx tests but like i sad before thay needed to inclued same clocked X2 chips as well
untill X4 3ghz cpus are out or can run at it 2.6ghz X4 performs like an 2.7-2.9ghz X2 cpu (apart from when more then 2 cores are used then it smoke all X2 chips no mater what clock speed thay run at, Divix for e.g.)
DAAMIT I'm now in limbo, wanting to upgrade, but not really sure if i should..... (actually i'm pretty sure that I shouldn't)
I still maintain these are better products than Intel's C2Q. A real-world testing using heavy multi-tasking would show the benefits of a monolithic design and in a cluster environment this would simply win hands down, since inter-core bandwidth is essential. Intel's offerings concentrate on nstructions per clock - not bandwidth.
8 of these cores when used in a server would blow away Intel; the memory latency and HTT 2.0/3.0 interconnect would be leaps ahead. Intel cannot fit monolithic cores onto a single die as the design is flawed.
When are we gonna see 128-bit SIMD instructions to really show off what this can do?
I urge you all to check out this review http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/amd_phenom/ on lost circuits and direct you to the multithreading benchmarks F.E.A.R and especially UT3.
All isn't lost for AMD