AMD Phenom II X2 555

With the release of its new Clarkdale Core i3 / i5 processor, Intel took the top spot in 2010. By introducing the "cheap" Core i3 as a desktop processor at a price of at least $ 113, against the background of rival AMD, Intel clearly miscalculated.

That is why AMD has launched a new line of processors in order to exterminate the competition at the root. Although only the name and release date are new in these processors, everything else is absolutely the same. And also, of course, new is the operating frequency of the processor, which, although not significantly, is increased. This, apparently, is explained by the developers of the company in the number "5", which replaced "0". For example, we have already seen this in the Athlon II X4 630 (2.8 GHz), which was transformed into a "completely new" Athlon II X4 635 (2.9 GHz).

The same "performance" happened with the Phenom II X2 555 I am considering today, as we can see from the table below (data taken from the official site) there are not many differences between the Phenom II X2 550 BE, which have been clearly known for a long time.

Of course, the most significant factor is the size of the L3 cache, which brings these dual-core processors closer to quad-core ones. AMD is following the beaten track, blocking two cores from quad-core processors, thereby creating a budget option. At the same time, of course, there is always a chance to unlock all the cores and get a full-fledged quad-core, saving almost $ 50. This fact brought the success of the Phenom II X2 550 BE and naturally AMD hopes that the new Phenom II X2 555 BE will not remain on store shelves.

During testing, I tried to determine whether the increase in operating frequency affected the performance of the processor and how much, again, this characteristic made it closer to four-core processors.

Test configuration.

Applications used

1) BAPCo SYSmark 2007 Preview (ver 1.05)

2) SPECCPU 2000 v1.3

3) Futuremark PCMark 2005 Pro

4) Lightwave 3D 7.5

5) 3ds Max8 (SP2)

6) Cinebench 10

7) Futuremark 3DMark06 v1.1

8) AquaMark3

9) World in Conflict v1.05

10) Crysis v1.1

1. BAPCo SYSmark 2007 Preview (ver 1.05)

So what are we trying to estimate the performance gain

As you can see, the gain is minimal, but at the level of quad-core offerings and even surpasses them.

2. SPECCPU 2000 v1.3

In this application, the indicators change dramatically depending on the load on the processor and, as we can see, the dual-core processor is clearly inferior in multithreading.

3. Futuremark PCMark 2005 Pro

Here I appreciated the work of memory

4. Lightwave 3D 7.5

5.3ds Max 8 (SP2)

6. Cinebench 10

7. Futuremark 3DMark06 v1.1

8. AquaMark3

9. World in Conflict v1.05

10. Crysis

As you might expect, the high clock speed did its job in the first gaming application. Whether this is due to the L3 cache or the clock speed, there is no doubt, the performance is clearly at its best.

As for Crysis, the results are not so rosy. Intel is clearly at its best, but AMD is not the lot. Although quad-cores have shown good results.

I will also give a table of energy consumption

What can I say, of course, the Phenom II X2 555 BE is clearly not a new processor. Changing the frequency to 100MHz undoubtedly does the trick, but they don't add much performance. Against the background of the development of six-core processors, AMD is trying to keep its market position of budget proposals afloat, which leads to the release of well-known processors with slightly changed characteristics.

Should I buy this processor? And once again, yes, it is an ideal office solution or an upgrade solution, and the ability to get a full-fledged quad-core processor for a price around $ 100 makes this processor the best in its class.

Tests have shown that the Phenom II X2 555 BE performs well in many applications, and in gaming applications, when using more memory and a modern video card, it can easily compensate for the existing shortcomings.