is there really much difference?

[Shai]

im getting a core 2 duo system for use as a gaming machine.

is a core 2 duo 6600 really that much better than a 6400?

if i get a 6400, will it have a big prefOrmance difference when playing games?

bearing in mind that i want to run games on high graphics settings, ( im using this gpu- )

http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/ProductInfo.asp?WebProductID=545050

 

[Assman]

e6600 is better for rendering/encoding apps because it has 4mb cache (e6400 has 2mb). basically difference in gaming is marginal, if any at all.

 

[Whizzard9992]

You'll get a little more performance out of the E6600 stock because it has a higher multiplier (x9 versus x8) over the E6400. You'll be able to overclock the E6400 a little higher than the E6600, however, because the E6400 has less cache.


Personally, I'd go with the E6400. For the $80 difference, it's not worth the extra 5% or so of performance. I'd tuck that money away for a year and invest it in Penryn, which should get you much more bang for your buck.

 

[Assman]

agree ^, i think e6400 is better bang for buck.

 

[m25]

e6600 is better for rendering/encoding apps because it has 4mb cache (e6400 has 2mb). basically difference in gaming is marginal, if any at all.

Celerons had a great penalty over P4s. Don't know how a core2 behaves but if you see some reviews fs Athlon64s vs Sempron64s, at the same clock rate they deliver almost identical performance.

 

[Shai]

thanks everyone for repling!

ill go with the e6400 then

cheers!

 

[dragonsprayer]

i tell you what the e6600 is better and will perform better with bigger cashe

but my e6300 is at 2.7ghz stable as heck - why waste cash!

i run an e6300 with 2x1950xtx in cf

put the case in the psu , dram or gpu