What's the difference?

Between these two processors:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...00343&Description=5000&name=CPUs+/+Processors

According to AMD (http://products.amd.com/en-us/DesktopCPUSideBySide.aspx?id=40&id=42&id=43&id=44&id=45) the 1.325/1.35/1.375V is G2 and 1.25V/1.35V is G1, and I thought G2 > G1 but then according to newegg the BE is a G1??

G2 is better and most recent procs come with G2 core, I am sure you can pick up BE with G2 if you are looking, but why would you do that when you can get them from 4200+.

Why are G2's better? Are they better overclockers than G1's? If I was going to buy a new processor to overclock out of these two (which I'm not) should I pick up the non-BE in this case?

I'm fine with my G1 brisbane fro0m 2.1Ghz at 2.8Ghz stock volts. (I can get it to 3.2 but then that requires 1.6v full load (55-60*C))

The G2 is a newer stepping more tweaked but they do not realese the changlelog on the procs so can't tell what actually changed but saw some doing 3.2g at 1.25v so I would say they could deal with the 65nm leakage a bit better.
If you can do 2.8G then stick with it and wait till 45nm procs come out, would be a waste of cache to change processor for 10% extra performance what you would not even notice.
Dual K10 might worth it depending on price/performance, that we will see this summer but by the end of the year L3 cacheless 45nm quads come out might be cheap and still blow away all AMD has now.