- Joined
- Apr 10, 2007
The more I learn, the harder my decision becomes
. At this point, from a bang for the buck perspective, it seems I'm looking at either the E6420 or the E4300 come April 22. (A month or two ago, earlier E6300s, especially being Conroes and OCing so well, definitely seems like it was an easier decision at $183 vs $163 for E4300s.)
E6420 has going for it: wider 1066Mhz bus, Conroe core (hopefully better OCing), 4MB cache, decent 8x multiplier...for $183.
E4300: narrower 800MHz bus, less 2MB cache, Allendale core...but an easier 9x multiplier...for $70 less ($113) (that can be used towards a better video card, for example).
Pricing from here - here (E63XX speeds are listed wrong).
From a quick glance at this Anandtech article, comparing the stock 1.86 E6300 and the 1.8 E4300, it seems the E6300's wider 1066MHz bus and .06GHz (negligible) speed advantage results in about a 4% increase in performance. That seems to indicate the ~4% increase is due to a (1066 vs 800) 266MHz overall bus speed increase.
From the posts here, it seems that an OC'ed E6300 at 2.66GHz will be significantly faster than a stock E6700 at the same 2.66GHz. If I understand correctly, it's because when OCing, not only is the CPU clock speed increased, but the (FSB) and overall bus speed as well? I wonder how much of a difference, percentage wise? I'm also assuming this will scale if, for example FSB=420 (correlating to overall bus speed of 1640Mhz).
I don't remember where I saw it, but the 2MB vs 4MB cache difference seemed to result in about a 3-4% real world difference as well. EDIT: seems I was mostly wrong (thanks to jackrungh) - http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e6420_3.html
For me at least, I'm also looking at this from a newbie/mild OCing perspective, that is: if a $113 chip gets me from 1.8GHz to 2.8-3.0 on stock cooling (ok, maybe an upgraded air cooler when I start getting addicted to OCing) and none-to-minimal voltage increases (stability and longevity for given $$$ investment is also important factor), that's already some serious bang for the buck. (In other words, E4400 may offer 10x multiplier for only $20 more, but I'd probably be limited by heat/voltage first.)
And then (especially if I go with the E4300 as a "temporary" chip), when Q3 rolls around, a Core 2 Quad 2.4GHz Q6600 for $266 (currently $851?) doesn't seem like a bad idea, either...
Any thoughts?
. At this point, from a bang for the buck perspective, it seems I'm looking at either the E6420 or the E4300 come April 22. (A month or two ago, earlier E6300s, especially being Conroes and OCing so well, definitely seems like it was an easier decision at $183 vs $163 for E4300s.)E6420 has going for it: wider 1066Mhz bus, Conroe core (hopefully better OCing), 4MB cache, decent 8x multiplier...for $183.
E4300: narrower 800MHz bus, less 2MB cache, Allendale core...but an easier 9x multiplier...for $70 less ($113) (that can be used towards a better video card, for example).
Pricing from here - here (E63XX speeds are listed wrong).
From a quick glance at this Anandtech article, comparing the stock 1.86 E6300 and the 1.8 E4300, it seems the E6300's wider 1066MHz bus and .06GHz (negligible) speed advantage results in about a 4% increase in performance. That seems to indicate the ~4% increase is due to a (1066 vs 800) 266MHz overall bus speed increase.
From the posts here, it seems that an OC'ed E6300 at 2.66GHz will be significantly faster than a stock E6700 at the same 2.66GHz. If I understand correctly, it's because when OCing, not only is the CPU clock speed increased, but the (FSB) and overall bus speed as well? I wonder how much of a difference, percentage wise? I'm also assuming this will scale if, for example FSB=420 (correlating to overall bus speed of 1640Mhz).
I don't remember where I saw it, but the 2MB vs 4MB cache difference seemed to result in about a 3-4% real world difference as well. EDIT: seems I was mostly wrong (thanks to jackrungh) - http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e6420_3.html
For me at least, I'm also looking at this from a newbie/mild OCing perspective, that is: if a $113 chip gets me from 1.8GHz to 2.8-3.0 on stock cooling (ok, maybe an upgraded air cooler when I start getting addicted to OCing) and none-to-minimal voltage increases (stability and longevity for given $$$ investment is also important factor), that's already some serious bang for the buck. (In other words, E4400 may offer 10x multiplier for only $20 more, but I'd probably be limited by heat/voltage first.)
And then (especially if I go with the E4300 as a "temporary" chip), when Q3 rolls around, a Core 2 Quad 2.4GHz Q6600 for $266 (currently $851?) doesn't seem like a bad idea, either
...Any thoughts?
Last edited:
