AMD officially introduces Athlon 64 X2 6000+

The Athlon 64 X2 6000+ has been available from some online retailers since January, but AMD has now given the chip a formal launch. The processor is clocked at 3GHz and packs 1MB of cache per core, making it AMD’s fastest desktop offering for Socket AM2 yet. As evidenced by AMD’s updated price list, the Athlon 64 X2 6000+ has an official price tag of $464. That’s a good $138 more than the next chip down the line, the Athlon 64 X2 5600+.

AMD has also launched new single-core Athlon 64 3500+ and Athlon 64 3800+ processors based on its new 65nm process. The two chips run at the same respective 2.2GHz and 2.4GHz clock speeds with the same 512KB of cache as their 90nm predecessors, and they have rated power consumption of just 45W. The 45W Athlon 64 3500+ is launching at $88, while the 3800+ is $93.

Comments closed
    • Voldenuit
    • 13 years ago

    I think it’s telling that the 6000+ is a Windsor (90nm part).

    Yet another sign that AMD are having trouble with the 65 nm node*.

    * Although I’d prefer a 90nm X2 to the 65nm version anyway.

      • Buub
      • 13 years ago

      I don’t think it says any such thing.

      I think it more likely indicates that 65nm processors are going after the volume market. The highest-end parts are usually also low volume.

      It might indicate that the 65nm parts don’t overclock wildly (although Josh’s experience so far indicates that might be the case). But it also might indicate that they’re selling all the 65nm parts they can make in the highest volume segments.

        • Voldenuit
        • 13 years ago

        Low volume probably means they’re cherry picking.

        The 90nms don’t reliably get to 3 GHz, but I guess they think there are enough to meet the “demand” on the 6000+ and the 3 GHz 4×4. 65 nm doesn’t seem to add anything to clockspeed, at least at the curent stepping, although it’s possible AMD could pull off another Thoroughbred A to Thoroughbred B miracle.

        But with the current Brisbane core’s small cache, added latency, poor overclocking, half multipliers and comparable thermal performance to 90nm, the only thing 65 nm has got going for it is the (potential) ability to fill oem whiteboxes. Which I suppose is where the money is, but I’m more interested in buying a good part for myself than in AMD’s bottom line.

        • Proesterchen
        • 13 years ago

        I’m reasonably cerain AMD would rather sell a 65nm, 126mm², 3.1 GHz, 90~100W TDP part at the $450 price mark. (vs. the 90nm, 230mm², 3 GHz, 125W TDP)

        But the fact is that they don’t even claim to ship any higher than 2.6 GHz on 65nm, and that tells you something about the bins it’s producing.

    • Fighterpilot
    • 13 years ago

    Anandtech has a test on it up at the moment.It does pretty well against the E6600 but considering its $150 more it cant be considered much of a threat.

    • Proesterchen
    • 13 years ago

    From the Xbit and FiringSquad reviews I’ve alread read, it seems like the 6000+ should be priced below the E6600 at $300. (roughly equal performance, on average, but at almost twice the power consumption) And with the expected next round of Intel pricecuts, this highest-end Athlon should be in the $200~250 range.

    AMD’s current situation almost feels like Intel during Netburst’s last legs. Ugly, thy name is AMD.

      • eitje
      • 13 years ago

      only if they’re trying to compete in the retail market. their higher prices in that space might be a deterrent so that they can keep their OEMs happy & fully stocked. if that’s the case – as good a supposition as any – then their production is lower than Intel’s, which is to be expected.

      • flip-mode
      • 13 years ago

      Looks about right. But seriously, no one here considering buying an AMD chip should be looking beyond the Brisbane 3600 or 4400, and then overclock to x2-6000ish levels.

    • blastdoor
    • 13 years ago

    Have these been reviewed anywhere?

      • JoshMST
      • 13 years ago

      Yes, check the shortbread. I hear that Penstarsys.com article is pretty amazing 😛

        • flip-mode
        • 13 years ago

        It’s alright. It coulda used a C2D in there. 😉 And definitely an overclocked X2-3600 to show how really unnecessary it is to buy the high end part. The best part of the PenStar articles is the discussion of the business / manufacturing stuff that most other reviews don’t go into. Thanks for the article Josh!

          • JoshMST
          • 13 years ago

          Heh, if anyone wants to loan me a E6600 or E6700, I would happily compare it!!! I’ve tried to get Intel to send me one, but they just got their budget cut (not to mention the 10K layoffs). So things are tight there. With the winter months here, I seriously can’t afford a new CPU with high gas and electricity prices (gotta keep my family warm).

          But I would agree with you, if you are going to buy an AMD product I would stick to sub $200 levels of products… and overclock a 65 nm X2.

          Edit: I must admit I am seriously interested in seeing how fast the new 65 nm A64 3500+ and 3800+ clock. While single core isn’t terribly interesting, a budget gaming system with one of those might be a pretty compelling solution.

            • Shintai
            • 13 years ago

            Just because they wont send you a free CPU doesn´t mean they dont have the budget for it. Perhaps your site was unappealing. Anyway, I can always run the benches for you 😉

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This