Buying a core 2 processor ( opinions please )

[alcatraz678]

im quite lost here.. i need some expert opiniouns. i want to buy a core 2 processor (e6300 or e6400).

which of the two have high overclocking capabilities? i want my system to be stable even when its overclocked..

 

[TSIMonster]

IMO the 6400 is not worth the extra doe, althought, I'm sure the bigger multiplier is nice. Now the 6600 has 4M of cache which is nice.

 

[RichPLS]

agreed, either the 6300 for economy or the 6600 for budget overclocking performance.

 

[rwpritchett]

Read this article:

E6300 vs E6400 vs AM2

 

[Flopmouth_Fish]

I'd get the E6300 and save some cash

 

[maverick7]

i would honestly skip both and go with the 6600.

*but i really cant respond honestly or helpfully since you didnt state what you do with your pc...

 

[alcatraz678]

i would honestly skip both and go with the 6600.

*but i really cant respond honestly or helpfully since you didnt state what you do with your pc...

oh yah.. im very sorry.. here is it:

motherboard: Asus P5B
GPU: Asus EN7900GS
RAM: Kingston DDR2 1GB 667mhz
CPU: Core2 Duo (E6300 / E6400)
Hard Disk: 160GB Hitachi SATA

About the E6600, I can't buy that, my budget is not enough.

 

[Assman]

e6600 is NOT worth the money, only avg. 3.5% performance increase with 4mb cache 8)

 

[Flopmouth_Fish]

i would honestly skip both and go with the 6600.

*but i really cant respond honestly or helpfully since you didnt state what you do with your pc...

oh yah.. im very sorry.. here is it:

motherboard: Asus P5B
GPU: Asus EN7900GS
RAM: Kingston DDR2 1GB 667mhz
CPU: Core2 Duo (E6300 / E6400)
Hard Disk: 160GB Hitachi SATA

About the E6600, I can't buy that, my budget is not enough.

Change the HDD to anything Seagate; I wouldn't trust a DEATHstar.

 

[Assman]

true, i'd go with a 16mb cache wd sata

 

[alcatraz678]

oh ok, Thanks for the suggestion. Right now, im using hitachi 160gb.. no problem yet..

 

[Assman]

no problem, just want to add, i got p5b + e6400 oc like crazy, check my sig(cpu-z) 8) :lol:

 

[alcatraz678]

no problem, just want to add, i got p5b + e6400 oc like crazy, check my sig(cpu-z) 8) :lol:

wow, i didnt notice that.. lol can you go further more?? is that 100% stable?

because i thought that e6400 and e6300 have the same 2mb cached, so its better to buy e6300 right?

 

[rushfan]

im quite lost here.. i need some expert opiniouns. i want to buy a core 2 processor (e6300 or e6400).

which of the two have high overclocking capabilities? i want my system to be stable even when its overclocked..

The E6400 is a fabulous chip and the extra multiplier is worth it. If you have the cash, go for it. I think that when it comes to overclocking, an extra multiplier is more useful than extra cache.

The E6400 that I own runs rock solid at 3.4 GHz - an amazing 60% overclock. The trade off is a little more heat - a few degrees more at full load. I like my PC to be fairly quiet so I run the CPU fan at a lower speed, hence the slightly reduced overclock. The 60% overclock was achieved with air cooling, using less than 1.4v so it's reasonable to assume that this CPU has a few ponies left in it. I'll find out in a couple of months when I switch to water cooling.

 

[aequalsb]

I now have 3 E6300 Setups now. Cheap and totally whipped everything i had in this house. This puppy is soooo fast. Just get the 6300, use the difference to get a nice cooler for overclocking. =)

 

[alcatraz678]

whats the most stable clock for the e6300 or e6400 anyway? can it still be rock stable at a speed of 3.2ghz?

 

[illicitsc]

get the damn chip and try it yourself. no one can tell you how high it's going to go but yourself.

 

[Assman]

8*400 is rock solid i got zalman 9500 cnps, but im sure you can reach 3.2 on stock as well, e6400 would be nicer cause u can play around with multiplier more.

 

[Assman]

get the damn chip and try it yourself. no one can tell you how high it's going to go but yourself.

what kind of answer is this really, if you don't want to reply than don't

 

[alcatraz678]

get the damn chip and try it yourself. no one can tell you how high it's going to go but yourself.

thats why this forum is here right? to help each other not just to talk rubbish.

 

[alcatraz678]

8*400 is rock solid i got zalman 9500 cnps, but im sure you can reach 3.2 on stock as well, e6400 would be nicer cause u can play around with multiplier more.

Our 2.13 GHz chip was able to clock up to 2.68 GHz and maintain 100% stability throughout all of our tests. This is actually a little less than we were expecting, seeing how high others are clocking these chips. Keep in mind though, these are not Intel engineering sample chips, these are final retail product on store shelves, using the final B2 core stepping. We were able to get our chip to post and run Windows at up to 2.85 GHz, but we were not able to obtain 100% stability throughout all of our benchmarks until we clocked it down to 2.68 GHz. Nevertheless, even at 2.68 GHz, the Core 2 Duo can provide amazing performance, as you’ll see in the following pages.

dude assman, i read the article from that site, and said that the E6400 wont run stable when it was clocked until 2.85GHz

 

[Assman]

LOL, it will, just have to up the vcore a bit (mine is at 1.385)

 

[Assman]

when ocing just follow wusy's guide and you're gonna be ok

RE5PECT

 

[illicitsc]

whats the most stable clock for the e6300 or e6400 anyway? can it still be rock stable at a speed of 3.2ghz?

these are questions that can be answered through google easily. "YMMV" is the law overclockers abide by anyway. if he gets a nf5 board..he's gonna get a crap oc...stick to 965/975. or wait for rd600

 

[alcatraz678]

LOL, it will, just have to up the vcore a bit (mine is at 1.385)

icic, thats cool, i guess im gonna buy the monster.

what system configurations are you using with your E6400 now? im gonna follow it a bit.