Core 2 Duo E4300 Question

[Track]

The E4300 is the lowest-end Core 2 Duo CPU at 1.8Ghz and 800Mhz FSB.
This is despite the fact that it actually have a 9x multiplier!

Since its still built on the 65nm process as any other C2D, whos to say I cant overclock the FSB to the same clock speed as any of the others (400Mhz+)?

I dont know what dictates how high the FSB will go - is it the process size?
Because if I can have a 500$ CPU for 150$, thats a pretty good deal.

So what do u think?

 

[Track]

Yes, its an E4300 not an E6300, but E4300>E6300.

Talk to me on MSN - I need PSU help!!

 

[1Tanker]

The E4300 is the lowest-end Core 2 Duo CPU at 1.8Ghz and 800Mhz FSB.
This is despite the fact that it actually have a 9x multiplier!

Since its still built on the 65nm process as any other C2D, whos to say I cant overclock the FSB to the same clock speed as any of the others (400Mhz+)?

I dont know what dictates how high the FSB will go - is it the process size?
Because if I can have a 500$ CPU for 150$, thats a pretty good deal.

So what do u think?

So far, a couple of guys have gotten around 390FSB. So, 333MHz FSB should be relatively easy(with a decent mobo), for 3GHz. It looks like it's going to be the overclocking chip of the year...or maybe the best ever...we shall see. Two good things about it..you won't need top-of-the-line RAM(even for a 100% O/C) and it isn't going to stress the chipset as hard as an overclocked E6300.

 

[darkstar782]

Yeah I started a thread on the same topic months ago

@266FSB the e4300 is clocked as fast as an e6600. @333, it is at 3GHz.

It should also be the first true Allendale core, with only 2mb of cache on the mask. This should lead to a smaller die, lower power usage, and lower temps.

Being as 2MB cache is only a @4-5% handicap, and that no matter how highly binned these chips are they wont be able to be sold as anything higher than an e4300 due to the cache (if Intel testing shows the chip as stable @ 3GHz, it still doesn't have enough cache to be badged as an x6800)

This should mean that there are some very nice examples of the e4300 with a nice multiplier.

 

[jaguarskx]

Yeah, the E4300 should be an interesting CPU since it is likely to offer better performance than what AMD can deliver in the value segment. AMD really needs to get their act together on K8L, but at least they can rely on Dell to sell their Athlons.

 

[1Tanker]

For $17 more you can get the E6300 and you know it will overclock, why bother with theories to save $17?? :roll:

It's called a multiplier, you anti-Intel-Bytch. If you knew anything about overclocking, you wouldn't have wasted your energy typing that pitiful(as most of yours are) post.

 

[redwing]

My thoughts exactly.
333/200*2.0Ghz = 3.33Ghz and I can re-use my current 667Mhz ddr.

E4300, if indeed it can overclock like its Conroe relatives, should be a nice little chip. I've been tempted to get an 6300 and OC it, but when I heard that the Allendales run natively at 800fsb instead of 1066, I realized that the multiplier must be much higher (easier to OC).

Cheers

 

[p3matty]

For $17 more you can get the E6300 and you know it will overclock, why bother with theories to save $17?? :roll:

It's called a multiplier, you anti-Intel-Bytch. If you knew anything about overclocking, you wouldn't have wasted your energy typing that pitiful(as most of yours are) post.

I saw an article saying that the e4300 would be $113 in Q2 '07 when the e4400 is released (2.0 GHz, 2 MB, 800 MHz FSB) for $133. At this time, the price drops will hit for the e6300, down to $163, yet will be redone to have 4 MB cache. Those will be the three "value" segment processors to choose from.

http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=714230&starttime=0&endtime=0

$113 e4300, 1.8 GHz, 2 MB, 800 MHz FSB, x9 multi
$133 e4400, 2.0 GHz, 2 MB, 800 MHz FSB, x10 multi
$163 e6320, 1.83 GHz, 4 MB, 1066 MHz FSB, x7 multi

Putting a little math to this,
@ 200 FSB
4300 - 1.8 GHz
4400 - 2.0 GHz
@250 FSB - roughly equivalent to current 6300?
4300 - 2.25 GHz
4400 - 2.5 GHz
@300 FSB - roughly equivalent to current 6700?!?!
4300 - 2.7 GHz
4400 - 3.0 GHz
@333 FSB - dare I mention the 6800?!?!
4300 - 3.0 GHz
4400 - 3.33 GHz!!!

Am I way off line, or will we be able to get roughly a stock $1,000 processor of today (x6800 - 2.93 GHz, 4 MB cache, 1066 FSB - $960 today 12/19/06) for $113 in Q2 '07 (e4300 @333 FSB - 3.0 GHz, 2 MB cache, 1066 FSB).

Will the 4300 and 4400 be able to clock that high? Shouldn't they overclock better than the 6300 and 6400 due to smaller cache and larger multipliers?

Any help from someone that understands this better than I would be greatly appreciated, but I think I'll wait for the pricedrops before I upgrade regardless!!

 

[lp231]

What's the point of saving that little amount of money?
If you go with the 6300 you get 1066FSB which is better than
going for 800FSB.

2mb Core 2 Duos are called Allendale
4mb Core 2 Duo and Extremes are called Conroe!

Also according to Xbitlabs, these so called "new" processors will
not have "VT support or extremely high performance."

 

[1Tanker]

For $17 more you can get the E6300 and you know it will overclock, why bother with theories to save $17?? :roll:

It's called a multiplier, you anti-Intel-Bytch. If you knew anything about overclocking, you wouldn't have wasted your energy typing that pitiful(as most of yours are) post.

I saw an article saying that the e4300 would be $113 in Q2 '07 when the e4400 is released (2.0 GHz, 2 MB, 800 MHz FSB) for $133. At this time, the price drops will hit for the e6300, down to $163, yet will be redone to have 4 MB cache. Those will be the three "value" segment processors to choose from.

http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=714230&starttime=0&endtime=0

$113 e4300, 1.8 GHz, 2 MB, 800 MHz FSB, x9 multi
$133 e4400, 2.0 GHz, 2 MB, 800 MHz FSB, x10 multi
$163 e6320, 1.83 GHz, 4 MB, 1066 MHz FSB, x7 multi

Putting a little math to this,
@ 200 FSB
4300 - 1.8 GHz
4400 - 2.0 GHz
@250 FSB - roughly equivalent to current 6300?
4300 - 2.25 GHz
4400 - 2.5 GHz
@300 FSB - roughly equivalent to current 6700?!?!
4300 - 2.7 GHz
4400 - 3.0 GHz
@333 FSB - dare I mention the 6800?!?!
4300 - 3.0 GHz
4400 - 3.33 GHz!!!

Am I way off line, or will we be able to get roughly a stock $1,000 processor of today (x6800 - 2.93 GHz, 4 MB cache, 1066 FSB - $960 today 12/19/06) for $113 in Q2 '07 (e4300 @333 FSB - 3.0 GHz, 2 MB cache, 1066 FSB).

Will the 4300 and 4400 be able to clock that high? Shouldn't they overclock better than the 6300 and 6400 due to smaller cache and larger multipliers?

Any help from someone that understands this better than I would be greatly appreciated, but I think I'll wait for the pricedrops before I upgrade regardless!!I don't think they'll overclock any higher...or maybe not even quite as high as E6300, but for the money, lower RAM requirements, and less stress on mobo.... that will make them the preferred choice. They were also supposed to release an E4200(200x8=1.6GHz/2mb L2), but going by the latest announcements, i have a feeling they've dropped that model.

 

[dasickninja]

What the f*ck is your problem with Canadians?

 

[Track]

This thread is turning out to be funny.

Its amazing how much noobs know nothing abt PC hardware..

"Gee the E6300 must be better because it has a 1066Mhz FSB, and the E4300 has an 800Mhz"

ONLY thing that matters is multiplier, u stupid god damn noobs!