I didn't read all the pages here, but my current desktop PC with Phenom II X4 920 (AM2+ socket) is still my daily driver. It's practically my first more serious PC for games, though staying on economic side price wise.

No love from me. Everything post-939 and pre-AM4 was cheeks from AMD IMO

AlexZ wrote on 2026-03-06, 08:15:

I used Windows XP. What version of AIDA64 did you use? I used 6.0. It is from 2019 so should be capable of accurate readings.

I mostly use 10+ years old AIDA64 on Windows 7, but running the bench on the most recent version shows the same result. So it's b then, Gigabyte has some default "safe" settings that significantly hamper performance.

SPBHM wrote on 2026-03-08, 16:33:

I was a little bored on bought a phenom II x2 for my AM2 board, I had it running a brisbane athlon x2 at 2.5GHz, and the PII run […]
Show full quote

I was a little bored on bought a phenom II x2 for my AM2 board,
I had it running a brisbane athlon x2 at 2.5GHz, and the PII runs at 3GHz,
the performance difference is very noticeable, even in older games, I was trying to play need for speed underground 2 with maximum settings, and in some places of the map was feeling it not to be smooth, checking the FPS it would be over 100 in some spots ,and then go under 60 in others, with low ish GPU usage, with the PII those under 60 spots are normally well over 80, it feels a lot smoother overall, this, for a game from late 2004!
if you are maxim out games, k8 really shows it's age a lot more than Core 2 Duo and Phenom II sadly;
my PII is far from optimal, it's running with DDR2 800 and AM2 board (1000MHz hyper transport and so on), but even so, it was a big speed boost, also posted some 3dmark01 of the mentioned above upgrade: Re: My 3DMark01 Mega Thread
I know it's a bit unfair, the 6000+ would probably also get smooth over 60.

I play Underground 2 sometimes on single core Athlon 64 3400+ (2.2Ghz) and find it sufficient for maximum details at 1280x1024. It even runs NFS Most Wanted 2005 with maximum details except for car reflection refresh set to low as it overloads the CPU. Fast X2 AM2 CPUs should be fine for that and also NFS Carbon.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2026-03-08, 18:20:

AlexZ wrote on 2026-03-06, 08:15:

I used Windows XP. What version of AIDA64 did you use? I used 6.0. It is from 2019 so should be capable of accurate readings.

I mostly use 10+ years old AIDA64 on Windows 7, but running the bench on the most recent version shows the same result. So it's b then, Gigabyte has some default "safe" settings that significantly hamper performance.

I have multiple Gigabyte boards so I could retest on another identical AM2+ with the latest BIOS, AM3 and AM3+. I find it strange that a setting could affect L3 cache bandwidth that much. Not sure when I will have the time for this.

AlexZ wrote on 2026-03-08, 15:16:

This topic is intended for people who have the space and interest in AM2(+) and would like to get an idea what kind of performace are they going to get out of it before they go out and purchase parts. It was found to be capable of covering Windows XP/Vista/7 era, or shorter era with a weaker CPU. When it comes to utility of such a setup, it is an entirely subjective matter where not only performace plays part.

Why Limit it to XP-7? AM2 boards start from 98 natively. I personally think you got carried away there gatekeeping the discussion, it was on the edge but still relevant for the platform.

We already have a dedicated topic for Windows 98 on AM2 ( AM2 for Windows 98? ). Due to specifics of limited Windows 98 drivers/hardware support it's better to keep it separate.

There are like three AM2 boards with Windows 98 support in total. All have a lot compromises.

AlexZ wrote on 2026-03-08, 19:03:

I play Underground 2 sometimes on single core Athlon 64 3400+ (2.2Ghz) and find it sufficient for maximum details at 1280x1024. […]
Show full quote

SPBHM wrote on 2026-03-08, 16:33:

I was a little bored on bought a phenom II x2 for my AM2 board, I had it running a brisbane athlon x2 at 2.5GHz, and the PII run […]
Show full quote

I was a little bored on bought a phenom II x2 for my AM2 board,
I had it running a brisbane athlon x2 at 2.5GHz, and the PII runs at 3GHz,
the performance difference is very noticeable, even in older games, I was trying to play need for speed underground 2 with maximum settings, and in some places of the map was feeling it not to be smooth, checking the FPS it would be over 100 in some spots ,and then go under 60 in others, with low ish GPU usage, with the PII those under 60 spots are normally well over 80, it feels a lot smoother overall, this, for a game from late 2004!
if you are maxim out games, k8 really shows it's age a lot more than Core 2 Duo and Phenom II sadly;
my PII is far from optimal, it's running with DDR2 800 and AM2 board (1000MHz hyper transport and so on), but even so, it was a big speed boost, also posted some 3dmark01 of the mentioned above upgrade: Re: My 3DMark01 Mega Thread
I know it's a bit unfair, the 6000+ would probably also get smooth over 60.

I play Underground 2 sometimes on single core Athlon 64 3400+ (2.2Ghz) and find it sufficient for maximum details at 1280x1024. It even runs NFS Most Wanted 2005 with maximum details except for car reflection refresh set to low as it overloads the CPU. Fast X2 AM2 CPUs should be fine for that and also NFS Carbon.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2026-03-08, 18:20:

AlexZ wrote on 2026-03-06, 08:15:

I used Windows XP. What version of AIDA64 did you use? I used 6.0. It is from 2019 so should be capable of accurate readings.

I mostly use 10+ years old AIDA64 on Windows 7, but running the bench on the most recent version shows the same result. So it's b then, Gigabyte has some default "safe" settings that significantly hamper performance.

I have multiple Gigabyte boards so I could retest on another identical AM2+ with the latest BIOS, AM3 and AM3+. I find it strange that a setting could affect L3 cache bandwidth that much. Not sure when I will have the time for this.

I mean, it's not terrible, it's almost there on my X2, but I notice the lack of smoothness in some parts of the map, like the frame times/frame pacing struggles with the X2 and not the PII,
but, could be something with the combination I have, the graphics card (9600GT) and the driver version might have a higher CPU overhead in this game than whatever you used, or something else

SPBHM wrote on 2026-03-08, 21:14:

I mean, it's not terrible, it's almost there on my X2, but I notice the lack of smoothness in some parts of the map, like the frame times/frame pacing struggles with the X2 and not the PII,
but, could be something with the combination I have, the graphics card (9600GT) and the driver version might have a higher CPU overhead in this game than whatever you used, or something else

My GeForce GTX 275 is like 2x faster than 9600 GT, so it may be saving it in Underground 2, same in NFS MW05.

Brisbane was a little trick AMD pulled on us, halved the L2 cache without introducing L3. So at 2.5Ghz maybe same as 2.3Ghz Windsor.

If you still use 9600 GT, Phenom II X2 would probably benefit from something stronger, like GTX 560, GTX 660, those are super cheap, nobody wants them.

i hated Brisbane at first, was supper buggy with first gen AM2 boards. Didnt help that i had this motherf...as a motherboard for about 2 years paired the first year with a Brisbane 4800+ (even the memory of the bios is too small, so no microcode for Phenom 1, this one tops at 6000+)

it wasnt until i sold the 4800+ and upgraded by accident to a 5600+ Windsor that all the instability and boot problems were solved.

was my last DFI, shortly after they stopped producing motherboards.

I wonder why...

AlexZ wrote on 2026-03-08, 20:02:

We already have a dedicated topic for Windows 98 on AM2 ( AM2 for Windows 98? ). Due to specifics of limited Windows 98 drivers/hardware support it's better to keep it separate.

Mind going into those specifics, because that thread doesn't? It's two people speculating about whether an AM2 98 build would make sense, a third guy comes in to say yes from experience, thread over. I've had no hard time getting supported and unsupported AM2 boards running 98, ME, and 2000, so we can talk about whether these builds make sense.

There are couple interesting AM2 board which may be useful for Windows 98:

https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/asus-m … -vista-rev-1-00
https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/asus-m … eluxe-rev-1-03g (needs to be soldered)
https://theretroweb.com/motherboards/s/asus-m … ional-rev-1-02g

They have TPM connector, which could be compatible with dISAppointment - LPC to ISA adapter - ISA on modern motherboards

If it works, they will require a case with additional slots on the side though.

I've been using AMD CPUs exclusively ever since Palomino days. Over the years I used the following AM2/3 CPUs:

- Athlon64 X2 3200+
- Athlon X2 5000+
- Phenom X3 8450
- Athlon II X4 640
-FX 6100
- FX 8300

I loved them all.

AlexZ wrote on 2026-03-08, 21:35:

My GeForce GTX 275 is like 2x faster than 9600 GT, so it may be saving it in Underground 2, same in NFS MW05. […]
Show full quote

SPBHM wrote on 2026-03-08, 21:14:

I mean, it's not terrible, it's almost there on my X2, but I notice the lack of smoothness in some parts of the map, like the frame times/frame pacing struggles with the X2 and not the PII,
but, could be something with the combination I have, the graphics card (9600GT) and the driver version might have a higher CPU overhead in this game than whatever you used, or something else

My GeForce GTX 275 is like 2x faster than 9600 GT, so it may be saving it in Underground 2, same in NFS MW05.

Brisbane was a little trick AMD pulled on us, halved the L2 cache without introducing L3. So at 2.5Ghz maybe same as 2.3Ghz Windsor.

If you still use 9600 GT, Phenom II X2 would probably benefit from something stronger, like GTX 560, GTX 660, those are super cheap, nobody wants them.

the graphics card didn't appear to be a limiting factor, because I'm running the game at 1024x768, GPU usage according to monitoring softwares is very low, and lower when the framerate drops, typical of CPU limitation,
Brisbane was indeed a bit slower on the same clock than Windsor due to higher l2 cache latency, also only has 512k while other flavors of k8 might have 1MB per core, but, at 2.5GHz with DDR2 800 dual channel it should still be fairly OK for a 2004, but yeah

vvbee wrote on 2026-03-08, 19:23:

AlexZ wrote on 2026-03-08, 15:16:

This topic is intended for people who have the space and interest in AM2(+) and would like to get an idea what kind of performace are they going to get out of it before they go out and purchase parts. It was found to be capable of covering Windows XP/Vista/7 era, or shorter era with a weaker CPU. When it comes to utility of such a setup, it is an entirely subjective matter where not only performace plays part.

Why Limit it to XP-7? AM2 boards start from 98 natively. I personally think you got carried away there gatekeeping the discussion, it was on the edge but still relevant for the platform.

AM2 is poor for Windows 98 IME

I've done 98SE and AM2 with no issues. It's one of the systems I nicknamed "Maid Fantome" because of the color choices.

Quick specs:
- ASRock AM2NF3
- AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
- 4x1GB (2x Crucial Ballistix + 2x Mushkin) DDR2-800
- 320GB Samsung split into three partitions (98SE w/ RAM patch, XP SP3 and Mandriva 10.1 DVD edition)
- Audigy 2 ZS + Diamond MX300 audio combo
As for GPUs, they've been constantly shuffled for testing in 3dMark. Notable cards - X800GTO, X850XT, GF6800NU and GT, and a 7800GS AGP on G70 core.

For me the AM2 platform makes less sense for DX9+ than for DX8-. For XP and above you can just use Sandy or Ivy or even Haswell, better efficiency at no higher cost. The AM2s struggle for performance and efficiency here. On the other hand for pre-XP they have plenty of speed and can run passive in the 10-20 W range.

PcBytes wrote on 2026-03-10, 01:55:

I've done 98SE and AM2 with no issues. It's one of the systems I nicknamed "Maid Fantome" because of the color choices. […]
Show full quote

I've done 98SE and AM2 with no issues. It's one of the systems I nicknamed "Maid Fantome" because of the color choices.

Quick specs:
- ASRock AM2NF3
- AMD Phenom II X4 955BE
- 4x1GB (2x Crucial Ballistix + 2x Mushkin) DDR2-800
- 320GB Samsung split into three partitions (98SE w/ RAM patch, XP SP3 and Mandriva 10.1 DVD edition)
- Audigy 2 ZS + Diamond MX300 audio combo
As for GPUs, they've been constantly shuffled for testing in 3dMark. Notable cards - X800GTO, X850XT, GF6800NU and GT, and a 7800GS AGP on G70 core.

a beast!

i have an Athlon x2 250, a much more modest system, with4gb ram and a nice old hd6450 and 500gb hdd - and that runs win7 plus a bunch of games like doom3, quake 4, even fallout 3 all ok at 1600x900. I wouldn't put win98se on it but fun that its possible i guess