Apple M4 Max (14 cores) vs Athlon 64 X2 5000+
Aggregate performance score
M4 Max (14 cores) outperforms Athlon 64 X2 5000+ by a whopping 4672% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3124 | 289 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Apple M4 |
| Power efficiency | 0.22 | 11.57 |
| Designer | AMD | Apple |
| Architecture codename | Windsor (2006−2007) | no data |
| Release date | May 2006 (19 years ago) | 30 November 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 X2 5000+ and M4 Max (14 cores) 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 14 (Tetradeca-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 14 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 4.51 GHz |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 220 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 154 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 X2 5000+ and M4 Max (14 cores) 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 | no data |
| Socket | AM2 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 80 Watt |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Apple M4 32-core GPU |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.46 | 21.95 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 14 |
| Threads | 2 | 14 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 80 Watt |
Apple M4 Max (14 cores) has a 4671.7% higher aggregate performance score, 600% more physical cores and 600% more threads, a 2900% more advanced lithography process, and 11.3% lower power consumption.
The Apple M4 Max (14 cores) is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ in performance tests.
Note that Athlon 64 X2 5000+ is a desktop processor while Apple M4 Max (14 cores) is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
