Only one meter late last decade would have made you pretty popular among your fellow PC builders and gamers.

In September of 2009 though, AM they launched this the Ethel on two x 46 20 a quote core processor that retailed for just $99 or a touch under £80.

Whilst the likes of AM these 965 black edition CPU run on the existing Deneb Die from the FINA export chips, the X 46 20 made use of a new architecture prospers, which allowed only to produce it for less and therefore charge less for it.

Spec wise.

The Athlon two x 46 20 therefore lacks an L three cash, but with four cause a 2.6 gigahertz clock speed on a wallet friendly price tag, budget users could finally experience four core computing without breaking the bank.

So where did this thing sit on the market in terms of competition?

Well, Intel's cheapest court core, offering the court to quote Q 8200 cost around $160 or £130 with reviews at the time finding that in some cases the X 46 20 was faster on.

In other instances, think you ate 200 was quicker.

Of course.

The Athlon also benefited from more flexible motherboard compatibility options, with users being able to choose either.

And I am three bold with DDR three memory or AM two plus board a truly cost effective option if you wanted more performance without having to spend our on upgrading your motherboard, too.

So how does this CPU fit in today?

Well, let's take a look at some benchmarks for general usage.

The X 46 20 still feels smooth enough to use as an everyday CPU, though with performance comparable to the Q 8200.

That's no surprise, considering the socket 775 Quad cores have also held up quite well.

It's nice to see that if you invested in budget hardware all those years ago, then the 6 20 shouldn't be causing new many issues.

General Computing wise in cinnamon char 15 to 6 20 score 246 No, I don't have a Q 8200 to compare the scores, but I do have a Q 8300 which isn't too different in performance and that score 240 in the same multi corps test.

Not much in it.

Here also ran my custom Premiere Pro Brenda test, whereby I render a 10 80 p 60 f p s video clip within the software to see how fast it completes.

The X four took 45 seconds, so it's still okay for editing videos with Thank you 8300 took 43.

So, again, a very similar scenario in this case.

But let's talk about gaming.

No matter what modern game you play, your likely encounter 90 to 100% CPU usage with the X 46 20 I've paid it with age etix 10 50.

To better represent a budget scenario, just like with CPU intensive task, you'll experience similar results to that of a court to quad in games.

The reason I say that is because if you look up court in quantity 10 50 benchmarks here on YouTube, what you'll see won't be too different from what you get here either, so that should give you an idea of how this thing has aged, considering it costs less than $100 on release their almost 10 years ago.

That's not bad going, but what about the name three Suck?

It is a hole.

Is it still worth buying into?

Well, parts, at least here in the UK anyway, aren't as cheap as equivalent Intel 775 offerings.

But there are still some very capable CP use.

Ah named three like the six core Fina MES, for example.

It wasn't long ago I tested the X 6 10 35 T and found it did pretty well in modern games when paired with a new GPU.

The six coffee names would also make a nice upgrade from something like the 6 20 if you're still on the A M three platform and aren't sure where to go next but don't have much of a budget to upgrade.

The story of the X 46 20 to me is an interesting one, as it's low cost yet solid performance likely made pricing more competitive on both the sides of Intel and AMG Components on would have introduced a whole lot more people into the world of PC gaming, so there we have it.

Thank you very much for watching.

If you enjoy this video lever like on it, leave a dislike.

If you didn't subscribe to the channel if you haven't done so already and hopefully I'll see you all in the next one.