E6400 OR E6600 for Editing?

[ValueDriven]

What's the better CPU for Video editing (Movies & Photos)? Intel E6400 or E6600? I assume the extra cache of the E6600 might be significant for editing, but is the extra $100 worth it? I usually overclock strongly, probably on air (Thermalright Ultra-120 or Scythe Infinity at least initially). I primarily use Adobe PhotoShop Elements (photos), and Pinnacle (movies) [ADOBE Premiere Elements (when upgraded)]. I know that system memory is important for editing, and plan on 2GB. I don't do hardly any games.

 

[godman]

get the e6600 idealy, however if you're overclocking a e6400 will be just as okay, as long as you get a motherboard that allows for a high fsb like the gigabyte ds3 and such. Although the higher multiplier of the e6600 will help because it allows for a more relaxed fsb when overclocking, the 4mb l2 doesnt help that much. 5-10% performance increase, depends on what application you're using although yeah it would help a little. also you have bragging rights if you get the e6600 :lol: (4mb over 2mb)
if you get the e6400 and overclock to 2.5/2.6ghz or so it should make up the 2mb cache differnce, the e6400 will give you the appropriate speed needed if overclocking, however the e6600 ensures you get the speed you need (if the fsb doesnt reach as high as you'd hoped)

 

[1Tanker]

What's the better CPU for Video editing (Movies & Photos)? Intel E6400 or E6600? I assume the extra cache of the E6600 might be significant for editing, but is the extra $100 worth it? I usually overclock strongly, probably on air (Thermalright Ultra-120 or Scythe Infinity at least initially). I primarily use Adobe PhotoShop Elements (photos), and Pinnacle (movies) [ADOBE Premiere Elements (when upgraded)]. I know that system memory is important for editing, and plan on 2GB. I don't do hardly any games.

While the extra 2MB cache should undoubltedly help, there seem to be mixed reviews on this.

Anandtech found some fairly good results(8-10%) in DivX and WME9 with the added cache:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=4

X-bit labs didn't get much improvenent in P/S CS2(~2% quicker) with the added cache:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/print/core2duo-e6300.html

behardware also found negligable improvements in DivX(2.7%) with the added cache:
http://www.behardware.com/articles/623-10/intel-core-2-duo-test.html

There are some charts/numbers to mull over, and decide if the added expense is worth it to you, as only you know what the extra price means to your wallet. If i had the money, i would go for the E6600, yet overclocking the E6400 really looks like a lot of fun/ego booster/bargain proposition. GL

 

[AddictiveHerring]

Of course the E6600 would be abetter cpu for video editing, it's a better cpu.

Is it worth 100 bucks? I dunno, is your company paying? If not I would go E6400, and if you want you could literally run the proprietary overclocking tool that would undoubtedly come with your mobo to kick it up to an E6600 in terms of performance, most likely on stock cooling.