Is AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ any good compared to Pentium?

Hi
I am thinking of buying a new pc HP make with AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ but having problem deciding if its any good compared to Pentium for gaming?

Thanks.

Pentium is equal as I presume you’re talking about Penitum Dual Core E2*** which is Core Duo arch.
//Danne

Even though I’m an AMD man all the way I’ve never owned or probably never will own a Intel
CPU I’ll have to say that from all of the evidence I’ve seen is that the Intel CPU’s do have a
slight advantage over AMD when it comes to gaming and video encoding. I’m running a AMD
64 X2 5000+ Black Edition in my system and it does every thing I could want or ask for a CPU
to do. I’d have to say if the price is lower for the 64 X2 5000+ then go for it as in real life the
Intel advantage won’t make that big of a difference but it will make quite a big difference in the
synthetic benchmarks area for the Intel CPU though. :iagree:

[QUOTE=getit29;2155595]Even though I’m an AMD man all the way I’ve never owned or probably never will own a Intel
CPU I’ll have to say that from all of the evidence I’ve seen is that the Intel CPU’s do have a
slight advantage over AMD when it comes to gaming and video encoding. I’m running a AMD
64 X2 5000+ Black Edition in my system and it does every thing I could want or ask for a CPU
to do. I’d have to say if the price is lower for the 64 X2 5000+ then go for it as in real life the
Intel advantage won’t make that big of a difference but it will make quite a big difference in the
synthetic benchmarks area for the Intel CPU though. :iagree:[/QUOTE]

Right on getit29, most people just get glossy eye when Intel uses it high marketing approach but in the end most will never see those high test marks cause most of us never use it to the extreme. It just about marketing and making money. Do you think they really are taking about the rest of us, most likely not in the case of Intel. AMD is for the mass I think even if it has a lower CPU speed you will never really notice it and for those dual and quad cores. Forget it people unless your software game or productivity uses it you won’t see much change in everyday uses which I think a vast majority uses it for. It’s all eye candy until the software and other hardware catches up to the CPU dual and quad cores and even then they would have quad quad cores or more. So think realistically, when you do decide to buy one how are you really benefiting and can you really tell the difference in everyday computing. Don’t forget to factor price as well and how the company competes with it’s competitors. I know Intel most likely has heavy handed AMD by forcing companies to go with Intel and that to me shows lack of competitions and shouldn’t get any support. If your product are better then you competitors-would either bow out or make their product better IMO.

I use an AMD +6000 dual core. Not a bad cpu for the price. When using DVD shrink it transcodes about 500 frames per second. I’m going to use them in other projects like a disc server and mobile lan box (not for gaming though). I figure at the price I can overclock them 'till they sizzle and just replace them if they conk out.
Not extremely fast at stock speeds but I think the dual-core really helps when I multi-task. When I compress wav files to mp3 and run Photoshop at the same time it doesn’t slow down the compression hardly at all.
I’m sure Intel’s are great chips, I’d just rather give money to the underdog. Especially when the chips are this good…