Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Conroe E6300 Or Amd X2 3800

Last response: in CPUs
Share
November 6, 2006 12:06:50 AM

hey can u pls tell me the best processor for gamin
if my budget is less then i'm planin amd
so pls tell is Amd X2 3800 DDR2 Ram or Amd X2 3800 DDR Ram
is the best
conroe or E6400 or E6300 pls
pls
pls

More about : conroe e6300 amd 3800

November 6, 2006 12:08:03 AM

If you can afford, E6300 is a better choice.
November 6, 2006 12:12:00 AM

Dual core won't help your gaming at this point....very, very few games even take advantage of the dual core. A faster clock speed will help though.....however, in the near future games will take advantage of dual cores.

For a bit of extra money, the 6300 will beat the 3800 no problem. And if you overclock the 6300, it will absolutely destroy the 3800....I know, I've owned both ;) 
Related resources
November 6, 2006 12:13:12 AM

Quote:
Dual core won't help your gaming at this point....very, very few games even take advantage of the dual core. A faster clock speed will help though.....however, in the near future games will take advantage of dual cores.

For a bit of extra money, the 6300 will beat the 3800 no problem. And if you overclock the 6300, it will absolutely destroy the 3800....I know, I've owned both ;) 


Because he only asked about x2 3800+ and E6300, I will give this answer :wink:
November 6, 2006 12:26:33 AM

If you are going to be doing other heavy tasks, go with the Conroe, if you are just gaming, you will not NOTICE a difference between the two cpu's. Both of them overclock quite a bit, so if you OC them the performance will stay close to the difference it was at stock. Recap, the 6300 is better all around, if you are doing alot of encoding and stuff of the sort, the 6300 would probably be a better choice. If you are just gaming, the 6300 will get higher AVG FPS, but the difference between 60 and 70 FPS cannot be seen by the human eye. When the FPS drop below 30 is when you start to notice it.

wes

Edit: and if you buy AMD go with socket AM2 if you want a future upgrade path. 939 will be a dead socket in the future. IE no more cpu's designed for it. I am not sure if they already stopped or not, but I would assume they have.
November 6, 2006 12:51:12 AM

Quote:
If you are going to be doing other heavy tasks, go with the Conroe, if you are just gaming, you will not NOTICE a difference between the two cpu's. Both of them overclock quite a bit, so if you OC them the performance will stay close to the difference it was at stock. Recap, the 6300 is better all around, if you are doing alot of encoding and stuff of the sort, the 6300 would probably be a better choice. If you are just gaming, the 6300 will get higher AVG FPS, but the difference between 60 and 70 FPS cannot be seen by the human eye. When the FPS drop below 30 is when you start to notice it.


But when purchasing a new CPU, you need to take the future into account as well. While the AMD is sufficient for current games, it will become out of date much faster - so the 6300 is the better choice unless you are planning on upgrading the CPU again in the 12 months.
November 6, 2006 1:13:54 AM

Don't mislead the OP. I highly doubt that a dual core 3800 will be insufficient for games in 12 months. The most imporant aspect in building a gaming pc is the video card. Any dual core CPU should be sufficient for games for quite some time. This time next year, both CPU's should have no problems running the most current title. This time next year alot of people will still be using single core cpu's..... so don't count on any of the dual core cpu's being insufficient for games. However this is all my opinion as was the last post his opinion.

wes
November 6, 2006 1:19:21 AM

if you can afford it the e6300 is alot better than the 3800.

check the benchmarks

the performance increase is big, well worth the price imo.
November 6, 2006 1:23:00 AM

Quote:
hey can u pls tell me the best processor for gamin
if my budget is less then i'm planin amd
so pls tell is Amd X2 3800 DDR2 Ram or Amd X2 3800 DDR Ram
is the best
conroe or E6400 or E6300 pls


Conroe will give you the best price/performance ratio and they run awsome! ( I own an e6400)
I was origionally going for AMD also, until the Conroe parts came out and they were a little cheaper than AMD at the time.

I would go for the AM2 if you choose AMD. If you choose Core2duo chips, then go with either the e6300 or e6400. The e6400 is on par with the FX 60 chip as far as gaming and other apps, but the e6300 or e6400 will do you good.

If you have about $40 more to spend, go from the e6300 (think it's like $180) to the e6400. not much price wise, but you WILL NOT regret putting this chip into your system.. Plus, Conroe chips are great overclockers (if you ever want to overclock) In fact, they are INSANE!
a c 480 à CPUs
a c 122 À AMD
November 6, 2006 1:25:27 AM

Based on benchmarks the E6300 performs like an X2 4200+ or 4400+ depending on the benchmark used. You can overclock both X2 3800+ and E6300, but the E6300 will still be faster.

Go for whichever one fits into your budget. However, technically speaking the E6300 will last longer than the X2 3800+ because it is faster. Most games are bottlenecked more by the GPU than the CPU so that is where you want to spend your money.
November 6, 2006 1:37:09 AM

Agreed with Jaguar. I think we all agree with the 6300 being a faster CPU. I am only trying to tell this person that both are more than enough for gaming, and IN GAMES you would not notice a difference. Both are good, Conroe is faster, in games you won't notice..... go from there.

wes
November 6, 2006 2:08:06 AM

Two very important questions that should have been asked before debating which of those CPUs scores the highest in benchmarks :

1- What is your current hardware

2- What is your budget
November 6, 2006 2:27:01 AM

If you have the extra $40, and it wint get you a better gfx card, get the 6300.
Either chip will keep you in the game for the next three years, with a decent gfx card, and upgrade. The 6300 will just do it a little better.
November 6, 2006 3:05:57 AM

Everybody has flooded this with responses already, but yes, I agree with everybody else: 6300 is the way to go!
November 6, 2006 4:11:30 AM

What I don't understand is why everyone says "if you can affoard an E6300". Right now you can get an E6300 for $183 including shipping from www.pricewatch.com. Or you could go with the "cheaper" x2 3800: $207 for s939 or $176 for am2. Prices change hourly, but the trend right now is that the E6300 is the same if not cheaper than the x2 3800. You could up the ante and go for the E6400 for about $40 more, give or take a few bucks. Oh, and availability of the E6300 at those prices is pretty good.

The bottom line is you should do some research and check out some hardware sites, like tomshardware.com, for benchmark results of the E6300 and E6400 compared to just about every other processor. With just a small amount of overclocking you can get the E6300 or E6400 to perform better than an FX 62! And thats with stock air cooling. My last bit of info is this: the intel chips are much better at overclocking. The x2 3800 cannot be overclocked beyond 500 mhz above stock speed with air. And I know that because I own both chips!
November 6, 2006 5:05:11 AM

Quote:
What I don't understand is why everyone says "if you can affoard an E6300".


People are referring to total system cost. While the E6300 may be cheaper, motherboard is likely to be more expensive.
November 6, 2006 7:09:40 AM

Quote:
What I don't understand is why everyone says "if you can affoard an E6300".


People are referring to total system cost. While the E6300 may be cheaper, motherboard is likely to be more expensive.

No, not true. You can get a mobo combo and E6300 for under $250. That's just as inexpensive as an x2 3800 and mobo combo. Like I said earlier, just take some time and research what's availble.
November 6, 2006 7:22:34 AM

Quote:
If you are going to be doing other heavy tasks, go with the Conroe, if you are just gaming, you will not NOTICE a difference between the two cpu's. Both of them overclock quite a bit, so if you OC them the performance will stay close to the difference it was at stock. Recap, the 6300 is better all around, if you are doing alot of encoding and stuff of the sort, the 6300 would probably be a better choice. If you are just gaming, the 6300 will get higher AVG FPS, but the difference between 60 and 70 FPS cannot be seen by the human eye. When the FPS drop below 30 is when you start to notice it.


But when purchasing a new CPU, you need to take the future into account as well. While the AMD is sufficient for current games, it will become out of date much faster - so the 6300 is the better choice unless you are planning on upgrading the CPU again in the 12 months.

AMD will not become out of date much faster, depending on which socket you choose. AM2 will be aroung for quite a while and will support the new AMD processors. I think it depends upon which other hardware you want to buy (mobo etc)
November 6, 2006 7:22:56 AM

It depends, Conroe is clearly the better performer, but if you have a decent amount of DDR RAM already and are considering a S939 upgrade, then suddenly your looking at paying a lot more for that performance upgrade with Conroe.

I'm in a similar predicament at the moment, I want to upgrade and have pretty much decided against going with Vista straight away. My original plan was to get a machine that would last me 5 years without requiring a platform change (so GFX/CPU/RAM upgrades only). If I'm not going with Vista though, I have a gig of DDR400 RAM that I know overclocks to 460-480, so I'm seriously tempted to go with a S939 3800+ based system and save myself quite a bit of money. Then I'll probably get an entirely new machine in H2 2008 when Quad Core and DDR3 are more mainstream.

So in summary, it all depends on what you can reuse from your current system, what your budget is and how long you intend the machine to last you.
November 6, 2006 7:52:10 AM

Quote:
What I don't understand is why everyone says "if you can affoard an E6300".


People are referring to total system cost. While the E6300 may be cheaper, motherboard is likely to be more expensive.

Which is countered by the fact that you need DDR2-800 for AM2 as DDR2-533 performance is mediocre at best - DD2-533 lags behind DDR2-800 by 10 - 20% in games!

I'm sorry, but an X2 3800+ is really just a dual core A64 3200+, and running it with DDR2-533 will only be equivalent to running an A64 2800+ with DDR400!, assuming the game is single threaded (and must current titles are). Note: It requires DDR2-667/800 to match or exceed S939 DDR400 levels of performance, DDR2-533 is a good 5 - 10% slower than DDR400.

And again, I'm sorry to upset the AMD fans, but that is NOT good enough for some of the latest games. I find my ageing XP-M @ 2.6GHz and P4-C @ 3.5GHz sluggish in CS:S and BF2, and I don't think an X2 3800+ being limited to DDR2-533 (for effective A64 2800+ speeds) will fare any better.

However, DDR2-533 is sufficient for C2D, as performance is within 5% of DDR2-800. The vast price difference between the RAM does not justify the small jump in performance.

All things considered, C2D with DDR2-533 will cost the same as AM2 with DDR2-800, and C2D will still end up 10 - 15% quicker overall.

Of course, such damning news will most likely upset the AMD fans in these forums, so I'll provide a link to prove I'm not pulling BS out of my ass: http://anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=2800&p=7

Notice how much of a performance hit AM2 takes with DDR2-533 as opposed to C2D. Enough said.
November 6, 2006 9:00:47 AM

Well, you might want to try other websites other than Pricewatch for those prices. Both newegg and zipzoomfly are less expensive than the prices which pricewatch is advertising. The AM2 X2 3800 is on average at least $20 less expensive than the E6300. As for the memory, I am not sure if 5-5-5-15 is considered tight for DDR2..... I know it isn't for DDR1, but the point is, on ZZF, some Geil 2gb kits with those timings are $199 for 800 and $189 for 533. That makes up a little of the price difference. Also, all the X2 3800's I saw on newegg and ZZF were out of stock, so you might be SOL even if you did want to go that route. I am basically just responding to the post by Korbin to show that his numbers were off.

As far as overclocking the X2 3800, again I think your numbers are off on the overclocking, I had mine well over 500mhz on air, and I have had others in my pc doing the same. Your right in the fact that it does not OC on average as high as the 6300 does, but don't skew the data, and you might want to look around on some sites before you state as being a fact.

wes
November 6, 2006 9:43:08 AM

Thanks a lot guys no i think so Core 2 Duo E6300 will be the best
and can anyone tell me the best graphics card can i get in
Geforce 6 series 256 Bit pls
November 6, 2006 9:50:40 AM

You really need it in the 6 series? A $124 7600GT will do better.
November 6, 2006 10:24:42 AM

Quote:
Thanks a lot guys no i think so Core 2 Duo E6300 will be the best
and can anyone tell me the best graphics card can i get in
Geforce 6 series 256 Bit pls
If you're going to get stuck with a Geforce 6 series card, I would suggest going for the X2 3800+ so you can put the extra $50+ towards your videocard.
November 6, 2006 12:10:18 PM

Not sure how it compares, but newegg has a open box x1800gto for $159. But that depends on whether or not you want open box stuff. But like the ninja said, I would not go with a 6 series if you can help it. And if it requires getting a less expensive cpu, I would also recommend it. The higher end video card will serve for a much better experience than the Conroe over the X2 3800.

wes
November 6, 2006 12:26:25 PM

hey guys Geforce Fx 7300 Gs 512 Mb Is it good man
pls tell me
November 6, 2006 12:28:18 PM

how much do you have to spend, and what componets do you need to buy?

wes
November 6, 2006 12:40:40 PM

Quote:
how much do you have to spend, and what componets do you need to buy?

wes


hey man i'm from india and my budget is around 35000 Rupees in ur words 900 dollars so tell me
November 6, 2006 1:15:10 PM

I'm just curious as I'm building a new Intel rig...

What speed of memory should I be looking at for a Core 2 Duo 6300? I plan on doing some mild overclocking (nothing really exotic). Should I be looking at 533? 667? 800? I only plan on getting the cheap modules from Kingtston/Corsair (most liklely Corsair).

EDIT:

If it's not too much to ask, could you give me your justification to your answer? It's one thing to know the answer, it's a whole different thing to know why....
November 6, 2006 1:21:17 PM

what are all of the componets you need though?

$900 to buy what?

CPU
Motherboard
Memory
Video Card

Anything else?

Are you going to need a case and power supply along with hard drives and optical drives?

This question will serve as a base for everyone else following this thread to make educated suggestions. I am going to sleep and will respond when I get up later this afternoon(I work night shift)

wes
November 6, 2006 1:34:38 PM

Sorry, thought I could skate by without mentioning ;) 

My current system is:

Athlon 64 3200+
1 GB Kingston ValueRAM
Rosewill 600W PSU
Seagate 300GB drive
ATI Radeon X1900XTX
Asus A8N-SLI 32 (I believe)

What I want to upgrade to is:
Intel Core 2 Duo 6300
Rosewill 600W PSU
Seagate 300GB drive
ATI Radeon X1900XTX
GIGABYTE GA-965P-DS3
2GB of memory (eventually)

My current rig is what I'm giving to my g/f as I upgrade to mine. I want to keep my 300GB drive/video card/power supply as I already have a spare X800GTO, Antec 480PSU.

I will be buying the memory for my system (and a hard drive for hers) so I can migrate it over to her future system. I realized about halfway through the build I require DDR2 (Intel noob here, haven't had an Intel machine since 98).

I've heard a lot about 667 memory being preferred for the Core 2 Duo, also some people have been saying 800 is the way to go. I was just wondering what everyone else feels is better and why?
a c 480 à CPUs
a c 122 À AMD
November 6, 2006 1:50:58 PM

Quote:
I'm just curious as I'm building a new Intel rig...

What speed of memory should I be looking at for a Core 2 Duo 6300? I plan on doing some mild overclocking (nothing really exotic). Should I be looking at 533? 667? 800?


DDR2 533 - This is the RAM the C2D CPUs are designed to be used with. You may be able go get a small amount of overclocking with this RAM speed. This RAM operates at 266MHz (533 / 2).

DDR2 677 - This RAM is for mild overclocks. The RAM operates at 333MHz (667 / 2).

DDR2 800 - This is the RAM you want to get if you want to push your overclocks to the limit. There are fast RAM I believe. This type of RAM operates at 400MHz (800 / 2).
November 6, 2006 2:15:26 PM

Thanks that's all I needed
November 6, 2006 2:26:08 PM

hey man that's all 900 $ for all motherboard , cpu,monitor, ram everything
November 6, 2006 3:17:24 PM

$900 for all that is gonna be a bit tight for a good gaming rig.

Just get the 7600GT, prices are dropping and it's one helluva card for the price, it will handle anything at 1280 rez.
November 6, 2006 4:06:07 PM

What about a 7900GS?
November 6, 2006 4:26:59 PM

E6300 can be overclocked to beat an FX-64...
November 6, 2006 5:36:50 PM

A 7900GS will work too.......both will handle "typical" games at high settings, but not at 1600+ rez though....or Oblivion ;) 

But the 7600 is awfully well-priced for the performance.........comes down to budget I guess.
November 6, 2006 5:47:11 PM

E6300 is definitely better than Athlon X2 3800+ ...
November 6, 2006 6:31:23 PM

I have a 939 x2 3800 clocked to 2.8ghz and I am constantly regretting it. I only had to wait about 2 months but I didn't. I'm satisfied with my system but I drool over the core 2 benchmarks way too often. Unless AMD comes up with a good counter soon, my next system will be C2D all the way. You can get a cheap ASRock board and an E6300 and moderately overclock it and be happy using your old components as well.
November 6, 2006 6:58:02 PM

Actually, you don't need averages when looking at a CPU or motherboard. There are plenty of both out there were you can find them for the best possible lowest price. I don't search the internet for the "average" price of a CPU or a mobo. I look for the cheapest price at the time for the specific product I'm looking for. pricewatch includes prices from newegg and almost all other tech companies you can think of. Sometimes there prices aren't up to date, but if you spend some time looking around you'll find the best price. Pricewatch is more of a starting place. Anyway, they don't sell anything themselves.

My point is that an E6300 can be found at just about the same price as an x2 3800. Motherboard options are no longer an issue. You can pick one up in any price range. Memory is another topic. The man's question was wether to go with an E6300 or X2 3800. The choice should now be obvious.
November 6, 2006 7:34:12 PM

EDIT: This post in tangental, I read a few earlier post in this thread re: single core vs. dual. You asked only about dual core processors. You'll be happy with either. I love dual core, read below if you care why. I personally have a E6300 and love it! I wish I would have gotten an E6400, some say its multiplier is more condusive to a good overclock.

Dual core in and of itself will not help you with gaming directly. However, I enjoy playing DS2 with my friends online. We use Microsoft Messenger or Team Speak to comunicate via voice over the internet. I use an antivirus program with realtime protection.

So if you are playing games by yourself, and you turn off your virus scanner, and everything else, dual core won't help.

If you play games online, and use some program to talk to your friends, it will help a lot. Reason: one core is 100% committed to running your game, the other core can use its CPU cycles to take care of the other tasks, such as voice communication, and virus scanning.

On my old Athlon 2100 XP gave me Duengon Seige 2 frame rates of 35+ without a using messenger. With Messenger voice chat running my fps went to 15. Obviously thats an old processor now, but its also an old game. Do you think playing FEAR on a current single core processor with voice chat running could run better if that conversation was being processed by a separte core? I do.
November 6, 2006 8:07:02 PM

E6300/E6400. Has my vote. Great OC'ing capacity.
November 6, 2006 9:01:34 PM

Quote:
Well, you might want to try other websites other than Pricewatch for those prices. Both newegg and zipzoomfly are less expensive than the prices which pricewatch is advertising. The AM2 X2 3800 is on average at least $20 less expensive than the E6300. As for the memory, I am not sure if 5-5-5-15 is considered tight for DDR2..... I know it isn't for DDR1, but the point is, on ZZF, some Geil 2gb kits with those timings are $199 for 800 and $189 for 533. That makes up a little of the price difference. Also, all the X2 3800's I saw on newegg and ZZF were out of stock, so you might be SOL even if you did want to go that route. I am basically just responding to the post by Korbin to show that his numbers were off.

As far as overclocking the X2 3800, again I think your numbers are off on the overclocking, I had mine well over 500mhz on air, and I have had others in my pc doing the same. Your right in the fact that it does not OC on average as high as the 6300 does, but don't skew the data, and you might want to look around on some sites before you state as being a fact.

wes


No, 5-5-5-5-15 is about as 'loose' as you can get with DDR2 timings. Idealy you'd want 4-4-4-12 or better for DDR-2.

Decent DDR2-800 costs significantly more than decent DDR2-533.

As for overclockability, an E6300 outstrips an X2 3800+ by far. How often do you see an X2 3800+ break 3GHz? And even if it does, it's still 20% slower than an E6300 @ 3GHz.

Of course, if overclocking, the cheaper RAM argument on C2D goes out the window because you need DDR2-800 RAM to get decent overclocks anyway. However, the performance delta between an E6300 and X2 3800+ becomes even greater once both are overclocked.
November 6, 2006 10:29:48 PM

I've owned and OC'd both the X2 3800 and the E6300. The C2D absolutely trounces the AMD, not even close. SuperPi times are HALF in the C2D, and I still have headroom in the OC.

Either will help you, not necessarily with gaming per se, but with all the other stuff associated with it. As posted by Epsilon, running all those other things in the background will be a piece of cake....not to mention any other regular cpu-intensive tasks you will do.

Since the price difference isn't that much on a C2D cpu/mobo vs AMD, you're FAR better off getting the C2D.

As I've said, I've owned both, and the C2D 6300 is quite simply an amazing piece of engineering. It makes the AMD look sluggish by comparison.

And I'm no Intel fanboy for the record, I'm a bang-for-the-buck fanboy. And in this case, the C2D wins hands down.
November 6, 2006 11:25:15 PM

Well, that is a pretty tight budget to build the entire system, on, if you can afford it, go with a Core2 cpu, if not, go with an AMD based system. The single core line 3800+ is around $115, so that could help out a bit. Or you could go with a Pentium D, in order to have dual core and upgrade later to Core 2. Just keep in mind, for gaming, the video card is the more important of the two choices. So, if you have to get a lower end CPU now, and upgrade down the line.... do it.... because if you get a low end video card, you will very likely not be satisfied with it. Price out the parts and make a decision.

wes
November 8, 2006 2:59:00 AM

Quote:
hey can u pls tell me the best processor for gamin
if my budget is less then i'm planin amd
so pls tell is Amd X2 3800 DDR2 Ram or Amd X2 3800 DDR Ram
is the best
conroe or E6400 or E6300 pls
pls
pls



LAME

bump
November 8, 2006 5:45:21 AM

A lot more expensive :( 
November 8, 2006 9:29:09 AM

Quote:
hey can u pls tell me the best processor for gamin
if my budget is less then i'm planin amd
so pls tell is Amd X2 3800 DDR2 Ram or Amd X2 3800 DDR Ram
is the best
conroe or E6400 or E6300 pls
pls
pls

The E6300 outperforms the X2-3800+ in 95% of the available software. Especialy for gaming, the E6300 is better choice than the X2-3800+.
November 8, 2006 1:47:39 PM

Yep........

Preferred on a moderate budget: E6300

On a tighter budget: AMD w/ DDR....you could possibly re-use your RAM, get a cheap mobo and spend the money on a better graphics card, or else save some money overall. It's not "ideal" but it'll still do just fine. An AMD X2 3800 with DDR RAM might be considered "old" but for gaming it'll do just fine, plus you'll still have a decent dual core CPU that will help with all your other applications and system stuff.

Remember, most people here are "enthusiasts".....most of the population, however, is not. We all have budgets, so if you have to go with a cheaper AMD w/DDR, don't be ashamed, it is still a good system, and affordable, and you'll be happy because you didn't break the bank. Hell, people are still buying P4's new, and an X2 3800 is better than those by far. So don't be fooled......it's a question of budget......IF you can afford it, the 6300 is the way to go. If not, an X2 3800 DDR will do the trick. It won't be as "upgradable" but if you don't care about cutting edge stuff, then it will do you for a couple years........just upgrade the video card at some point and you'll be good to go ;) 
!