Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

500 MHz FSB? Core 2 Duo Overtakes Core 2 Extreme

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
January 11, 2007 12:04:31 PM

Many users have reported great success overclocking the Core 2 Duo entry-level model E6300. We drove the 1.86 GHz processor to 3.4 GHz, but despite that, this model still isn't our first choice for overclocking any more.
January 11, 2007 12:51:47 PM

Oh joy! Does this mean we can expect to finally see the e6300 on the CPU charts? :p 
January 11, 2007 12:57:01 PM

IMHO, if you want a screamin' 3D system, spend the money on an e6300 and an 8800GTX. Overclock the e6300 and watch guys like me cry as you run ludicrous fps vs my screamin' cpu. My data indicate that the GPU has a gozillion times more influence on 3D scores than the CPU. But I get really high scores in CPU tests.

Tom
Related resources
January 11, 2007 1:40:25 PM

Impressive results. I wish they would include the cost of building a system for this type of overclocking so I don't have to look it up myself....... :?

If you look at the results of the stock 6300 and the X6800 and then the 6300 overclocked it gives you a nice boost but even at stock the 6300 is rather impressive IMO when compared to the X6800. A budget cpu with a good high end GPU in my opinion is the way to go if you overclock or not.

:wink:
January 11, 2007 1:55:27 PM

very interesting article i noticed the bit about the 6300 being the latest stepping F6 what is the best method of ensuring that you get one of this stepping (whats the manufacturers specific code) i think the article is dead on saying that now is a better time than ever to buy low grade.

however i didnt quite understand the last statement

Quote:
Despite all of this, the E6000 series is no longer our overclocking favourite, because a new model line is ready to launch soon: the E4000 series will come at similar clock speeds, but run at only FSB800 speed. Obviously, this makes these new processors much better overclocking candidates, as a Core 2 Duo E4300 at 1.8 GHz can reach even higher core clock speeds with less FSB stress.


surely with the E4000 series with a lower FSB will not perform as well as the 6300's 1066 unless the multi is up'd in which case it would be a far better performing overclocker as ram will be able to run tighter timings and will not hit the MOBO's Limit of 500Mhz quite as early.

but surely this would be the same with a 6600 (F6 if there is one)(greater multi)
any one care to elaborate?
January 11, 2007 1:56:59 PM

It's all about price per watt. Overclock the 6300. Then put it side by side with a Core 2 Extreme and measure the power usage for a year using identical power supplys. Then tell me what the monetary difference was in your bill for electricity.
January 11, 2007 2:04:12 PM

10 minutes on P95 does NOT ensure system stability!
Perhaps best left for another article, but post OC testing is critical and 10 minutes won’t do it.
January 11, 2007 2:24:24 PM

I have similiar memory to what this article describes, but it always comes up in CPU-Z as 5-5-5-18 (it's actually 4-4-4-12 v2.1). I have exactly the same motherboard they're using and an E6600 processor. Why doesn't the motherboard properly detect these settings? Must I first increase the voltage to the memory? Or no matter what, am I forced to manually set the timings in advanced BIOS settings?
January 11, 2007 2:30:12 PM

I still don't see how their processor can idle at such a low voltage! My E6600 with C1E and Speedstep only goes to 1.14 V! Back in July 2006, TH had an Core 2 Duo ES that idled at 0.95V. WTH?! Does anyone else have their CPU voltage lower than 1.14V??? Or how about less than 1.00V???

Oh yea, my computer boots at 400 * 9 =3.6 GHz, but my hard drives won't boot!

How in the world do you clock it so high and still have everything working?

Am I one of the unfortunate ones that got the motherboard with a low FSB wall??? I know it's not my RAM or Power Supply.
January 11, 2007 2:39:45 PM

what type of CPU colling is used, or i missed to read it.
January 11, 2007 3:14:46 PM

This is a half done review. Was Tom's not able to get its hands on an E4300? 12 pages on what it takes to get high clocks on the E6300, and then just one line at the end of the article mentioning the E4300 and why it will be a better overclocking candidate. This is filler at best, published to compete with the other websites' E4300 coverage.

At least one good thing will come of this: Tom's will finally recognize the E6300 in it's cpu and HOPEFULLY AMD vs Intel price/performance charts. The excuse "We have not tested an E6300 and therefore do not know how it performs" was wearing mighty thin after six months.

Will it be another six months before Tom's reviews the E4300 and subsequently recognizes that it exists? :roll:
January 11, 2007 3:19:36 PM

Quote:
Using the Core 2 Duo E6300 instead of the E6400 saves you $30, and we also recommend sticking with the default cooler that comes with the CPU. In our E6400 overclocking project we used a liquid cooling solution to provide maximum cooling for the processor, but the E6300 that we bought proved to be an even better overclocker, and doesn't require sophisticated cooling measures. The answer likely lies in the processor stepping: the E6400 sample was an F5 stepping, while the current versions are F6.


There you go. Whether they're serious or not, who knows...

I'm guessing they meant they used the stock cooler. *shudders*
January 11, 2007 3:20:21 PM

Go to Anandtech. They did a review on the 4300 and I must say, the results were quite interesting.

And not to be offensvie, but is your sig your main rig that you still use today??? 8O :oops: 
January 11, 2007 3:56:16 PM

This is what I was saying when the 8800 g card needs the fastest CPU write up. I said BS just for this reason. I do know what the story was saying, something different than the topic headline. Tom's hw also said the pc3 2000 Motherboard was the best board at the time and that too was bs and people bought the board and a few months later intel called back the chipset because of the MTH issue causing data errors. Even though nice right up again.
January 11, 2007 4:43:58 PM

Yeh I think they forgot one small thing - TEMPERATURE. :?
January 11, 2007 5:03:38 PM

Bah! Who needs temperature in an overclocking review :? ?
January 11, 2007 5:07:12 PM

Most people overclocking their E6300 with a good mobo and decent ram (look in my sig) already knew all this. My temp levels arent high 36 idle 65 is the highest i've seen and thats after orthos for a while and it only touches that and goes back down. And I have my vcore set at 1.4 in the bios and due to the vdroop its alot lower than that accourding to cpuz. I run mine at 3.33 24/7 and i had it stable higher than that but i dont see the point in running it any higher...its fast enough now.

I think some (not all) people replying in this thread are trying to justify why they paid so much more for theyre cpu. I dont have temp problems and i dont think my electric bill will suffer that much. iirc stock e6300 voltage is lower than stock e6700 voltages anyways.
January 11, 2007 5:08:32 PM

Quote:
Bah! Who needs temperature in an overclocking review :? ?


So that people know whether they're investing into a computer that can do work and play or make a nice bonfire :wink: :tongue:
January 11, 2007 5:11:20 PM

Haha! Someone had a post about that the other day. So, you're highest is 65C, huh?

Run Intel TAT full load on both cores and then come back and tell me you're readings :wink:

Not trying to be mean or anything, but from what I read, you use Orthos and Prime95 to test stability. Use Intel TAT to find maximum heat dissipated when run at full overclock.
January 11, 2007 5:20:55 PM

Quote:
Yeh I think they forgot one small thing - TEMPERATURE. :?

I love how they do overclocking testing with a crap ass Zalman cooler. Remember when they clocked the 805 with a 9500 and it kept overheating? It would get so much higher on a Tuniq Tower.
January 11, 2007 5:25:49 PM

*Fuming initiated*

Quote:
Yeh I think they forgot one small thing - TEMPERATURE. :?

I love how they do overclocking testing with a crap ass Zalman cooler. Remember when they clocked the 805 with a 9500 and it kept overheating? It would get so much higher on a Tuniq Tower.

Links for proof? :D 

I agree though. I wish they would do overclocks using software that other people use when measuring temps. Remember the Core 2 Duo review they did before launch? Saying that their CPU idled at 20C or something like that! Yea, I said the same when I built my computer and jumped into the BIOS. And then someone told me about TAT and I looked into it. 20C my butt! I was in the 40s Celsius. AT IDLE! "Yea, use stock it'll be fine... pssh. My Pentium 4 Northwood 2.0A GHz FSB 400 idled at 41C and went to 60C. Then, I overclocked to 2.66 GHz FSB 533 and went to 45C idle to 65C load I think. All with stock. That sounds fine. *shudders*

Seeing my Core 2 Duo hitting near 65C...Goodbye to new build :cry: 

Thankfully, I found this out before I started overclocking!

Can someone please inform TH to do overclocks with temp readings??? And use something that will accurately measure the temps?!

*Fuming completed*

:oops: 
January 11, 2007 6:17:05 PM

Took a while for THG to provide some reviews on the E6300.
Something fishy was going on...
January 11, 2007 6:29:58 PM

Quote:
Took a while for THG to provide some reviews on the E6300.
Something fishy was going on...


Screw the E6300, I'm waiting for the E4300!
January 11, 2007 6:58:34 PM

Anybody else noticed this:

From the article:

We used Gigabyte's GA-965P-DQ6, which proved to be an excellent overclocker in our last P965 motherboard roundup.

From the motherboard roundup article:

The highest-priced Gigabyte GA-965P-DQ6 comes in second place based on features alone, but with performance and overclocking abilities taken into account, lands near the bottom of our list. We're at a loss to explain why this board provided the lowest stable overclock, given its massively-cooled 12-phase power regulator and extensive range of overclock settings.

Have I missed something here or is there a new P965 motherboard roundup on the way?
January 11, 2007 7:00:47 PM

Quote:
Anybody else noticed this:

From the article:

We used Gigabyte's GA-965P-DQ6, which proved to be an excellent overclocker in our last P965 motherboard roundup.

From the motherboard roundup article:

The highest-priced Gigabyte GA-965P-DQ6 comes in second place based on features alone, but with performance and overclocking abilities taken into account, lands near the bottom of our list. We're at a loss to explain why this board provided the lowest stable overclock, given its massively-cooled 12-phase power regulator and extensive range of overclock settings.

Have I missed something here or is there a new P965 motherboard roundup on the way?

New F9 BIOS, silly.
January 11, 2007 7:01:15 PM

No, I noticed that too. I don't remember though which Intel 965 board was the better overclocker, so I didn't say anything. But last I remember, the Gigabyte board they used (which I almost bought instead of the ASUS) wasn't that great at all when it came to overclocking.
January 11, 2007 7:25:57 PM

Quote:
... from one day to the next, many people switched from AMD to Intel. This makes unmistakably evident the fact that there is no brand loyalty whatsoever in this industry, even though people tend to sympathize with underdogs, as many did with AMD only few years ago.

This comment made me pause to reflect.

The whole idea of "branding", as I understand it, is an attempt to make consumers perceive extra value among products that are otherwise identical so they will pay a premium for it. So I suppose at first glance the CPU biz should be a perfect market to work the magic of "Brand Loyalty". What could be more painstakingly identical than two i386 CPUs? The whole point of the common i386 architecture is that to the software the processors look absolutely identical, no?

Of course in this case they are identical except for their performance numbers. And in that area there is widespread consistent agreement on the how much of a performance gap there is between the two products. Definitely not identical in performance.

Cheering for AMD as an underdog or as a competitive prod to Intel or as whatever is one thing. But buying the system with the best performance for the money invested is something else entirely, no?

Perhaps there is as much brand loyalty for AMD (and Intel) as there ever was. And if/when the products offered by the two companies are more identical, more people will return to basing their purchase decisions on which brand they prefer. But at the moment, the two products are no longer perceived as largely identical so the concept of brand loyalty just doesn't apply.

-john, the mumbling redundant legacy dinosaur
January 11, 2007 9:36:09 PM

Good article, but I thought that THG was going to look at the entire portfolio of C2D's. I'd personally like to see a side-by-side comparison of all the models, even if it is only in graph form.

Here's some headlines that sprung to mind:

E6300 = the new 805D.

Overclocked cheapest chip outperforms most expensive chip at stock.

Is 2mb cache worth $800? Dear Lord I hope not!

:) 
January 11, 2007 9:52:51 PM

Quote:
Haha! Someone had a post about that the other day. So, you're highest is 65C, huh?

Run Intel TAT full load on both cores and then come back and tell me you're readings :wink:

Not trying to be mean or anything, but from what I read, you use Orthos and Prime95 to test stability. Use Intel TAT to find maximum heat dissipated when run at full overclock.


Got a link for that TAT? I tried to google it up but all I get are more forum entries from around the world lol.

Also I'd like to know what's so craptastic about Zalman coolers like one of the other posters said. My 9700 seems fine to me.
January 11, 2007 11:12:05 PM

Quote:
This is a half done review. Was Tom's not able to get its hands on an E4300? 12 pages on what it takes to get high clocks on the E6300, and then just one line at the end of the article mentioning the E4300 and why it will be a better overclocking candidate. This is filler at best, published to compete with the other websites' E4300 coverage.
:roll:

I'm glad you said it. I thought the article had little to add to what has already been covered at length all over the web. Maybe doing the same tests using different grades of memory at various price points would have given this article more relevance.
January 12, 2007 12:11:40 AM

That's funny cause my DQ6 with the F8 bios will not allow me to change FSB it will go into a continius reboot cycle until i remove teh power every single time. I have the 1.0 version. So i didn't read teh whole article if they are using the 2.0 version fine, if not i call BS since all the DQ6 users on the boards are experiencing teh same issue with the F8 bios.
January 12, 2007 12:53:23 AM

Quote:
[Also I'd like to know what's so craptastic about Zalman coolers like one of the other posters said. My 9700 seems fine to me.


I never said anything about that.
January 12, 2007 3:40:07 AM

You guys clearly weren't given an E4300 sample. This is a poor man's response to Anandtech and Xbit's labs' review of the E4300. I realize the E4300 isn't out yet, but who the hell is going to want a E6300 when it does?
January 12, 2007 11:07:20 AM

I wonder how far you can push 6800 since it has unlocked multiplier. Has Tom done some tests or maybe are some tests planed ?

Pawel
January 12, 2007 11:16:08 AM

hello ppl this conroe rocks , i´ve got one 6300 plus a nvidia 680 sli and i was able to get 500 mhz fsb and starts windows , then i´ve tried 510 and post but not stable , crashes in 3dmark06 , i´m waiting for a new cooler and i hope that it gets more stable. for budget overclokers like myself it was a great buy, even though the 680i is a very expensive board but is worth every penny.
January 12, 2007 12:04:26 PM

Quote:
*Fuming initiated*

Yeh I think they forgot one small thing - TEMPERATURE. :?

I love how they do overclocking testing with a crap ass Zalman cooler. Remember when they clocked the 805 with a 9500 and it kept overheating? It would get so much higher on a Tuniq Tower.

Links for proof? :D 

I agree though. I wish they would do overclocks using software that other people use when measuring temps. Remember the Core 2 Duo review they did before launch? Saying that their CPU idled at 20C or something like that! Yea, I said the same when I built my computer and jumped into the BIOS. And then someone told me about TAT and I looked into it. 20C my butt! I was in the 40s Celsius. AT IDLE! "Yea, use stock it'll be fine... pssh. My Pentium 4 Northwood 2.0A GHz FSB 400 idled at 41C and went to 60C. Then, I overclocked to 2.66 GHz FSB 533 and went to 45C idle to 65C load I think. All with stock. That sounds fine. *shudders*

Seeing my Core 2 Duo hitting near 65C...Goodbye to new build :cry: 

Thankfully, I found this out before I started overclocking!

Can someone please inform TH to do overclocks with temp readings??? And use something that will accurately measure the temps?!

*Fuming completed*

:oops: 

I have an E6300 running at 3ghz( can't go anyhigher due to motherboard ). I am using a stock heatsink, I run around 40C Idle, and under 60C full load I have never seen it hit 60C. This is in TAT. In bios I only hit around 50C.
January 12, 2007 1:50:20 PM

Not sure why Toms had to hit the CPU voltage at all, my setup is an E6300, corsair 2GB6400C4 (5-5-5-15 2.25v) on a P5B deluxe running at FSB 500 - CPU 3.5GHz totally stable on stock volts (or within spec anyway 1.375 i believe off the top of my head).

The only thing limitting the system is the ram, I could wind the voltage right up on it but don't want to fry it as its more then twice the cost of the CPU.

BTW Thermaltake ultra 120 > Tuniq's, Ninja's or pretty much any other cooler. I have an 1800rpm scythe fan on mine and see idle temps of around 33 and max dual orthos of 56. I do have an antec p900 case though, huge amount of air flows through that thing! Its also about 18 degree room temperature currently, which no doubt helps.

I'd love to up the voltage on the ram and north bridge to see just how far this setup will go ... but I'm too much of a wuss! :) 
January 12, 2007 7:19:50 PM

Hi there,

I have DDR2 Memory @ 667, how fast can I overclock the 6300? I have a ASUS P5W DH Deluxe, running 2 gigs of Mem, and a Pentium D 805 running at 3.6, with a Zalman cooler.


Many thanks,

Miro
January 12, 2007 7:26:43 PM

Quote:


surely with the E4000 series with a lower FSB will not perform as well as the 6300's 1066 unless the multi is up'd in which case it would be a far better performing overclocker as ram will be able to run tighter timings and will not hit the MOBO's Limit of 500Mhz quite as early.

but surely this would be the same with a 6600 (F6 if there is one)(greater multi)
any one care to elaborate?


The E6600 runs at 9x266. The new 4000 series (Anandtech has an overclock article thats pretty new for this chip) will have a E4300 that runs at 1.8GHz -- 9x200. You can see that their multiplier is the same, so they should overclock the same. Now, because the E4300 costs less you get quite a similar potential overclock (E6600 has 4MB; E4300 has 2MB, the 4300 should OC better) but a dramatically reduced price because you paid for a 1.8GHz not a 2.4GHz. Now, let's say you start with a 2.0GHz 4000 series, thats 10x200, so it is more likely to run into a CPU limitation before a FSB limitation than a 9x chip.
January 12, 2007 9:32:04 PM

I still find this hard to believe to hit even 480mhz with just a E6300.

I'm no overclocking expert but with my E6400 and eVGA 680I the highest i can hit is 3.5ghz(440FSB) and run stable, thats with a Clock of x8 and 1.5 FSB and CPU voltages.

Any advise on how to hit(or at least get near) 500FSB with an eVGA 680I and E6400?
January 13, 2007 6:12:29 AM

Quote:


surely with the E4000 series with a lower FSB will not perform as well as the 6300's 1066 unless the multi is up'd in which case it would be a far better performing overclocker as ram will be able to run tighter timings and will not hit the MOBO's Limit of 500Mhz quite as early.

but surely this would be the same with a 6600 (F6 if there is one)(greater multi)
any one care to elaborate?


The E6600 runs at 9x266. The new 4000 series (Anandtech has an overclock article thats pretty new for this chip) will have a E4300 that runs at 1.8GHz -- 9x200. You can see that their multiplier is the same, so they should overclock the same. Now, because the E4300 costs less you get quite a similar potential overclock (E6600 has 4MB; E4300 has 2MB, the 4300 should OC better) but a dramatically reduced price because you paid for a 1.8GHz not a 2.4GHz. Now, let's say you start with a 2.0GHz 4000 series, thats 10x200, so it is more likely to run into a CPU limitation before a FSB limitation than a 9x chip.

You do realize that 10xmultiplier chips can run all the way 6x multiplier right? :roll:
January 13, 2007 6:13:48 AM

Quote:
Hi there,

I have DDR2 Memory @ 667, how fast can I overclock the 6300? I have a ASUS P5W DH Deluxe, running 2 gigs of Mem, and a Pentium D 805 running at 3.6, with a Zalman cooler.


Many thanks,

Miro


You should hit 400fsb easy... I have ddr2-667 as well with my E6300. I can hit 428fsb... 3ghz...
January 13, 2007 6:35:11 AM

Quote:
I still find this hard to believe to hit even 480mhz with just a E6300.

I'm no overclocking expert but with my E6400 and eVGA 680I the highest i can hit is 3.5ghz(440FSB) and run stable, thats with a Clock of x8 and 1.5 FSB and CPU voltages.

Any advise on how to hit(or at least get near) 500FSB with an eVGA 680I and E6400?

Did you try to lower the multiplier????
P.S. Not an expert but the 680 boards are not that much better at OCing than the Intel boards. You might have better luck with an intel chipset.
January 13, 2007 7:20:21 PM

Thanks for your response.

Does anybody out there know if I'll get a drastic performance gain from an overclocked PentiumD 805 ruuning at 3.6ghz to a C2Duo 6300 running @ 3ghz? Is it worth it?

Many thanks,
Miro
January 13, 2007 8:18:00 PM

this i a double post - it is in cpu and should be!

article fails to overclocked the x6800 with the same board and system - therefore its a waste!

no conclusions can be made from half an article.


my e6300 runs 2.67-2.8 yes u can get 3.2ghz but u cook the nb
January 13, 2007 8:19:31 PM

wow that be a good article !

oc the 805 vs the e6300 vs the 4300! compare it x6800 and qx6700 with the same system

lets go thg!
January 14, 2007 2:46:56 AM

News Flash: Tom discovers new CPU which some claim overclocks like Crazy!!

We don't want to get too technical, but it is safe to say this E6300 overclocks to stratopheric levels of 400FSB and beyond!!! Now, you shouldn't try this at home as it may break your computer, or even worse, invalidate your warranty!! The spectacular performance of this new processor may even exceed the top-of-the-line Core 2 Extreme in our Ghz per dollar charts! Just wait until next summer when we should be able to update our chart, but no promises. Next in the rumour mill is the E4300 which will be the junior member of the Core 2 club. Not much is known about this mythical processor, but stay tuned for our upcoming entry-level shootout in the Fall against the Cyrix and hot Athlon XP processors... :lol: 
January 14, 2007 3:45:23 AM

Quote:
News Flash: Tom discovers new CPU which some claim overclocks like Crazy!!

We don't want to get too technical, but it is safe to say this E6300 overclocks to stratopheric levels of 400FSB and beyond!!! Now, you shouldn't try this at home as it may break your computer, or even worse, invalidate your warranty!! The spectacular performance of this new processor may even exceed the top-of-the-line Core 2 Extreme in our Ghz per dollar charts! Just wait until next summer when we should be able to update our chart, but no promises. Next in the rumour mill is the E4300 which will be the junior member of the Core 2 club. Not much is known about this mythical processor, but stay tuned for our upcoming entry-level shootout in the Fall against the Cyrix and hot Athlon XP processors... :lol: 


lol. spot on mate.
January 14, 2007 4:28:33 PM

1:11?

Is that a typo on page 3 of the article?

Shouldn't it be 1:1?
!