http://translate.google.com/transl [...] h-CN&tl=en

Well here is an early Athlon X2 6500 review. Looks to be a half way decent Overclocker too. At first I thought it was kinda ok for an AMD, but then I realized it was 3.4ghz on the stock AMD heatpipe cooler. But, on the other hand it looks like it's a fair amount faster than the k8s are clock for clock, especially when it comes to gaming.

These have been out for about a day and a half. Ive been saying all along, if these truly oc as well as it does here, and not too sure about a 1.4v and heat/stability, but if its all true, they actually have a decent dual core here

So it looks like 10%~15% faster clock for clock compared to the K8. Not bad at all, although still not good enough to compete with Intel's offering. However if they're priced right, it would definitely be an attractive option.

3.4Ghz overclock is decent, although not stellar.

Good enough for gaiming, and not lose too much. Im hoping these are priced well too . AMD needs that and more things like this. Maybe the sun will start to shine on them afterall

It's a step in the right direction. Could be the first AMD chip to reach 3.4Ghz reliably (I don't think the 6200+ hits it very reliably, but I could be wrong).

Meh

The X2 6400+ could reach 3.4GHz consistently, not that hard when its clocked 3.2GHz at stock.

That being said, 3.4GHz is just an arbitrary figure, a K10 X2 @ 3.4GHz would be equal to a ~4GHz X2.

I hate to say it but I doubt that the X2 6500 will help AMD much. They need to get into the real market. They need to come out with a quadcore that is on par or a little better than a Q9450 and price it next to a Q6600. I just can not see AMD firing back at this point, it will take something VERY amazing to save them now.

Not too sure about all the Intel claims when it comes to gaming. Heres a couple links that show in gaming , no matter how fast the cpu is, youll still get better fps by having a faster cpu. This is using the top gpus, but heres the interesting part, if you look, a Phenom at 3Ghz is equal to Intel at 3.6 in many of these benches, so if this holds true for this cpu (6500), it may turn out to be as good as any Intel cpu, when it comes to gaming http://www.legionhardware.com/docu [...] id=775&p=6 http://www.legionhardware.com/docu [...] id=770&p=4 This just shows how good these cpus are in gaming when theyre able to hit higher clocks, as they tend to keep up with Intel

WOW!! We didnt know that games were GPU limited. TOOL.

OK, smart man, what do you think of this? The higher you go with cpu clocks the higher the fps. Just leave will you? Heres a link for you to show tthat todays cpus LIMIT todays best gpus http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.asp?m=530527

It doesn't look like Devil May Cry 4 is CPU intensive. For example, Phenom 9150 @ 1.8Ghz scored less than 10% FPS compared to Phenom 9950 @ 3.0Ghz. Similarly, QX9650 @ 3.6Ghz is no more than 10% faster than Q6600 @ 1.6Ghz, yet the clock difference is more than 100%.

Word in Conflict should be a better benchmark in this case. Phenom 9950 @ 3.0Ghz is on par with E6850 at stock. Another example would be Supreme Commander. In this case, where the game is widely accepted as a multi-threaded application, we see Phenom 9950@ 3.0Ghz again is outperformed by E6850 at stock.

Same with Company of Heros and Quake War. So it does seem that Intel's CPU perform much better in gaming.

Read my link http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.asp?m=530527 Here it shows great scaling in Grid, wic, oblivion and HL2. If you include the IPC improvements we see in Deneb, this could all change. And whos to say some of these improvements isnt in these chips as well? Also, Id point out that in Supcom, theres only a 1-3 fps difference between a quad Intel and a dual at 3Ghz http://www.legionhardware.com/docu [...] id=775&p=3

But remember that link you provided only compared two different clocks on the same chip. You can do that with the same chip, and possibly the same architecture. However architectures different from each other. The same apply to E7200 may not apply to K10/K8.

As your link to LegionHardware showed, sure, K10/K8 benefited some by overclocking. However its still not sufficient compared to their competitors.

Now, it is true that there may be IPC improvements in Deneb. If I remember correctly the leaked Deneb benchmark indicated that Deneb is about 10% faster clock for clock compared to Phenom. This would put Deneb on par with the Kentsfield / Conroe, a 2 year old product that's being phased out, and not to mention the launch of Nehalem, which promised substantial performance improvements.

So my view on Deneb? Good, but not good enough.

Thats a possibility. But we dont actually know the full impact/changes to Dened either. If theyve changed the micro coding, itll show improvements without higher clocks or IPC. Like i7, we simply dont know enough. I agree, it may not compete with i7, but may fall somewheres in between conroe and penryn, which is a lot closer than where they are currently. And Im not so sure i7 will be a huge seller, so this leaves a lil more room for AMD if priced competitively. Supcom is overblown for its multithreading, as seen in my link. Most games dont benefit any more from a quad than a dual vs the older dual vs single thing. We saw 5-10% in Oblivion at the time, between dual and single, same here. Multi isnt working that well in games, unless you have some links? Being 30fps behind today with their old K8s and Phenoms doing so so, with Deneb, it may become within single digits and thats progress, and possibly competition as well, as again, IF theyre priced right