i5-12500E vs Athlon 64 FX-51
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 FX-51 and Core i5-12500E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 570 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | no data | 18.98 |
| Architecture codename | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) | Alder Lake-S (2022) |
| Release date | September 2003 (21 year ago) | January 2022 (2 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 FX-51 and Core i5-12500E basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 4.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 80K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 18 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 193 mm2 | 163 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 105 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 FX-51 and Core i5-12500E compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | 940 | 1700 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 FX-51 and Core i5-12500E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
Athlon 64 FX-51 and Core i5-12500E technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 FX-51 and Core i5-12500E are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 FX-51 and Core i5-12500E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 770 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 FX-51 and Core i5-12500E.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 1 | 6 |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 65 Watt |
i5-12500E has 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, a 1200% more advanced lithography process, and 36.9% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 FX-51 and Core i5-12500E. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 FX-51 and Core i5-12500E, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
