Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

E6300 Vs E6600

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 20, 2007 2:40:52 AM

Hey guys, I am going to upgrade my processor soon, so I need some good advice based on facts. I am thinking of getting either the E6300, or the E6600. Is the E6600 worth the extra 140-150 dollars over the E6300? Does that 2 mb l2 cache make that much of a difference?

Also, I just saw that the E4300 came out, so if I just decide that I'm going to get the E6300, I'll still be torn between getting it or the E4300!!! Or should I go for the E6400 (30 more dollars then E6300) with it's 8X multiplier? If I do overclock, the max I'm going to is roughly 2.6-2.8 ghz.

Or should I go for the Athlon X2 4200 or 4600+ socket am2? I really need some strong facts here to influence my decision.

ALL help is appreciate!
Thank you.

More about : e6300 e6600

January 20, 2007 2:52:35 AM

Well I looked I saw in an article on here that the E6300 overclocks better than the E6400 for some reason, even though the E6400 has a higher multiplier. But If I'm not thinking about overclocking to over 3.0 Ghz, wouldn't the E6400 be the best choice?

To tell you the truth, I haven't overclocked a processor before, and I'm in the process of learning by reading as many articles about it as I can find on here. Since I saw SO many people overclocking their Duo Cores to INSANE numbers, I thought an OC to 2.6-2.8 would be normal and it wouldn't cut the processor's life much (Looking for it to last at least 2 years). Ok, since you made it clear that the C2D beats the athlon, they're out of the picture. And since I am on a slight budget, then the E6600 is out of my range. The question still stands between the E6300 and E4300. Is there any new form of C2D coming out soon that's WORTH waiting for? Also, will the 800 FSB of the E4300 have that much of an affect on it's performance (if I don't overclock)?
!