Phenom II X2 550BE and Athlon II X2 250

Peter Gill (Buddy J)

June 1, 2009 9:00 PM ET in Review, , , , , , , , ,

Overclocking

This review took place with very short notice but we still had enough time left to overclock both chips a bit. We pushed both chips to a Prime95 stable 3.6GHz. The Phenom II X2 550 Black Edition did it at 16.5×220 at 1.4v with a 36°C full load temp. Given more time, voltage and some tweaks, we expect people to conquer 4GHz without much effort.

The little Athlon II X2 250 also managed 3.6GHz at 15×240 with 1.4v, and it turned in 41°C load temperature. Being multiplier locked, it’ll take some trick RAM to push this little fella higher, but the 15x multiplier isn’t a bad one to be locked at. Performance scaled in proportion to the overclock.

Conclusion

They aren’t bad little processors for their pricepoints. The Phenom II X2 550 Black Edition is fun to screw around with, and for $102 it’ll make a nice processor for some gaming boxes. The Athlon II X2 250, alternatively, will only cost $87, which makes it a deal for budget systems. It’s not a powerhouse but it’s capable enough. This is the kind of chip I’d give my email-checking, Solitaire-playing, YouTube-watching relatives.

Ultimately we were impressed with how cool both processors ran, even when we put the hurt on with a little bit of overclocking. While these chips won’t perform any miracles, our tests today have proven that they do have a few surprises on tap that make them perfect for their market position.

As of today, the Phenom II X2 550 Black Edition and the Athlon II X2 250 are stocking at retailers and should be readily available by next week.

« Previous

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Share |

4 Comments:

  1. Zuntar
    2 Jun '09, 10:19 am

    On the Crysis High settings graph, the two processors reviewed are not on this graph. What am i missing?

    I am curious how these stand against the 7850 Kuma as well, but i know that can be inferred by other reviews. Any thoughts?

  2. Buddy J
    2 Jun '09, 10:50 am

    Fixed the graph. For some reason the graph didn't update when I put in the new processor data. The 7850 Kuma is clocked slower and runs hotter. Subtract a third of the X3 8750's performance and you'll get a good idea.

    I'd take these 45nm chips over the Kuma any day of the week.

  3. Gargoyle
    2 Jun '09, 12:56 pm

    Nice review, Peter!

  4. Cliff_Forster
    2 Jun '09, 2:57 pm

    I recently purchased a Kuma 7750 for a budget build I was doing. For $59 and a free copy of "Call of Juarez" from newegg, you can't argue with it, but I will echo what Peter is saying, AMD's 45nm runs cooler, and offers a much easier overclock than the 65nm Kuma.

Troll-free since 2003 ®