E6300 v. Pentium 4

[nick111]

With the E6300 rated at 1.8 ghz would this be better than a pentium 4 chip rated at 1.8 ghz or not really? Wouuld bus speed make much difference?

 

[endyen]

I'm thinking that a single core P4 @ 6ghz could come close to the 6300.
A dual core pentium would need about 4.2 ghz.
And yes, Intel's new chips are that much better. On top of performance, they also run much cooler.

 

[slicessoul]

E6300 is Dual core while Pentium 4 is Hyperthreading Single Core. Performance of E6300 is more higher than P4.

E6300 Using less power and spreading less heat comparing to P4.

P4 using FSB 800 while E6300 is 1066. More faster the bus more faster data transfered.

E6300 has bigger memory cache than P4.

and any other facts to say than E6300 are better than P4....

 

[orsino]

I'm thinking that a single core P4 @ 6ghz could come close to the 6300.

Do you know that the dinosaurs were not killed off by the blast and fires set off by a crashing asteroid? It was a T-Rex who was OCing his P4 to 6GHz! :lol:

 

[apt403]

if you underclocked a c2d to like 300mhz it would probably still beat the life out of a pentium.

 

[nick111]

The E6400 has a multiplier of 8 with 2mb of cache. What would the E6600 have for a multiple and is having the 4 mb cache worth the extra money to purchase this? I would like my computer to be able to play the lastest games and simulators. Some games out there require alot of processor speed to run and I don't want to just get by.

 

[slicessoul]

Formula to find the multiplier : Speed (MHz)/ Real FSB (MHz)
Remember Intel is Quadpumped, so if the FSB is 800 MHz, the real FSB is 200.

Having more cache memory can help faster calculations.

If you have more money to spend on processor, consider the X6800 is including in your list. Benchmarkers said that this is the best and the fastest Processor for the moment.

 

[Pippero]

The FSB thing is overrated, for typical desktop applications.
Just look at Merom Vs Conroe benchmarks...

 

[slicessoul]

The FSB thing is overrated, for typical desktop applications.
Just look at Merom Vs Conroe benchmarks...

What do you mean overrated for typical desktop applications ? And what kind of desktop applications ? Windows Solitaire games that you can't see anymore the animation when they distribute the deck ?

 

[Pippero]

Suuure... :roll:
But Solitaire aside, you can also consider F.E.A.R., HL2, 3DStudioMax, Maya, Photoshop CS2, Flash MX, LAME MT...
The 667MHz FSB DDR2-667 2.33GHz T7600 performs virtually on par (given the clock speed difference) with the 1066FSB DDR2-800 2.4GHz E6600 in all those benchmarks...
Of course given a server load or compression tasks or scientific applications workin on huge datasets, this changes.
(link)

 

[shinigamiX]

The E6400 has a multiplier of 8 with 2mb of cache. What would the E6600 have for a multiple and is having the 4 mb cache worth the extra money to purchase this? I would like my computer to be able to play the lastest games and simulators. Some games out there require alot of processor speed to run and I don't want to just get by.

If you want to save money the E6400 is a great processor. Sure the E6600 is better but you can save a lot money and you won't even notice the difference. Trust me. Even if you do, they overclock great. I'd recomment you go with the E6400.

 

[bydesign]

You will notice a difference if you do CPU intensive tasks unless there close to the same clock speed, say both are 3GHz. Just keep in mind that the E6600 will clock substantially higher than E6400.