ok i here is my advice, i have had e6600, e6700 and e6400, i tried all of them out, the highest overclocks i have had were with the e6400, i have it watercooled, honestly i think they are the best overclocking chips and the best bang for ur buck, i couldnt overclock the e6600 more than 3.2 or the e6700 3.5, it i didnt matter i got the same score in games and 3dmark that i got with 3.2 with my crossfire system. because these chips are just too damn fast for the graphic cards, ok may be a little difference but 3.2 is just too smoking fast to do anything with chips.
this is my system
e6400 at 400x8 at 1.5v the actual 1.465 cuz my mobo is always drops it underload so i had to set it up at 1.5.
mvch voltage at 1.6
having this chip makes me it certain to believe that my mobo always had the juice but the e6600 and e6700 i could never clock them higher than 360.
well i am happy staying budget and having a crazy gamin system. i dont know why i could clock the e6400 at those speeds and not the e6600 and e6700.
i could do 390 at stock voltage but the last 100 mhz reequired a bump in the voltage. i hear everyone saying talk about 2mb/vs./4mb cache. well i agree with the ones that say it doenst matter much, i mean what can we do with 4mb cache what we couldnt do with 2. core 2's are so fast that it eliminates the need of the extra cache. well if u got the money get whatever u wish, i wanted to keep the e6700, but after trying all these chips from the retailer close to me, i decided to keep the e6400 and i love it. i am saving my money for r600 graphics. that will truly benefit us at these fast speeds.