What the diff between allendale and conroe

[little_scrapper]

whats the difference between E6300 and 4300? Besides the FSB, which as far as I know is basically an arbritrary number set my intel.

And how does it tie into this:
http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=30
Case 1:
E6600 @ 7x500 = 3.5GHz
NBCC = (9/7)*500 = 642MHz <- this NBCC may be unachievable by the NB which would artifically create what would be misdiagnosed as an "FSB wall"...

Case 2:
E6400 @ 7x500 = 3.5GHz
NBCC = (8/7)*500 = 571MHz

Im going to be upgrading to E6300 + P5N-E SLI. I want to OC well. But now trying to decide if I should save $20 and get the E4300. When are the E6350's gonna be available???? I am hopeing to hit FSB460x7 for 3.2Ghz and 1:1 for DDR920. Can I hit 920 with G.Skill 2x1B PC6400 4-4-4-12? Should I be looking at E4300 instead of E6300? Yes budget is a factor but $15-20 either way isnt an issue. I wnat to know what is best for this OC situation?

 

[m25]

________ 6300_________ 4300
Clock____1.86GH_______1.80GHz
FSB_____266__________200
Multiplier_7X___________9X
L2_______2M__________2M

Basically, with a 9x multiplier, the E4300 overclocks much better than the E6300 (multi 7X) because it requires a smaller FSB increase, thus not requiring a very high end motherboard and keeping it more stable.

 

[av1on]

Allendale=Conroe minus half L2, thats about it. It is the same core as far as e6400 and e6300 are concerned.

 

[darious00777]

The difference between the E4300 and E6300 is 66 mhz on the front side bus. And nothing is exactly arbitrary with hardware.

From what I understand, the E4300 is compatible with some older motherboards, the Conroes require newer motherboards.

 

[little_scrapper]

So would I be better of getting a E4300 and dropping the multiplier to 8x? Use a FSB of 450 for 3.6Ghz and ddr 900? As I understand it, you cannot raise the E6300 to 8x but you CAN lower the 4300 to 8x, yes/no?

anyways here is what I have on my list so far:

E6300 or E4300?
P5N-E SLI (any issues I should know about?)
G.Skill pc6400 4-4-4-12 2x1gb (PN F2-6400CL4D-2GBPK)
X1950 GT or PRO depending on budget?

I have a seasonic S12 600W and will be reusing case and drives.

Will that memory do DDR900 or should I be looking elsewhere. Gotta keep ram under $200. At least after rebates. Anyways the basic question is which CPU will I get the easiest/best OC and ram performance. Keep in mind that ram selection is changing weekly. So in two weeks or so when I pull the trigger on this the memory selection may change. I may consider buying one stick of patriot extreme to keep budget low, then later add another one. Or maybe a buffalo firestix. Want good OC ram but dont have $300 in the budget for the good stuff.

 

[zenmaster]

In addition to what others have said...........

The E6300 and higher support VT which may give a boost to things like VMWare.

A second note is that CPUID identifies the E4300 as a Conroe just to give you an idea of how close they are.

 

[little_scrapper]

which one will give me the best OC/performance?

 

[just2good4u3434]

If you were to get the E4300 why would you drop the multi. back down to 8x? With the 9x multi. you would only have to set the FSB at 400MHz and keep your ram at stock DDR 800 speeds, thus using less voltage to achieve higher memory speeds and you can still have great timings

 

[little_scrapper]

That was my thinking, but why not run DDR900. It has been said in a few threads that going from 5-5-5-15 to 4-4-4-12 gains less than 2%. But going from DDR800 to DDR900 is about a 12% increase, minus less then 2% for slower timings still gains me at least 10%. And whose to say that I would even have to drop the timings. I may end up with memory that runs DDR900 at 4-4-4-12. I may end up with memory that wont do 900 at all who knows

 

[scryer_360]

Here is the skinny of it:
IF you want to overclock, the E4300 is the better chip hands down. The reason is it features a far higher clock multiplier than the E6300.

Mathematically speaking:
E6300: 266*7=1.86 gigahertz.

E4300: 200*9=1.8 gigahertz.

So if we increase the E4300s clock speed to 266, we get
266*9=2.4 gigahertz.

At that point its basically a E6600 minus a little L2 cache, which for gaming and such really is not such a terribly big deal (But if money was no issue, it'd be wise to get an E6600 for the cache anyway)(since money is an issue the E4300 is better).

Here are my settings with an E4300:
288 FSB
9 multiplier
288*9= 2.6 gigahertz (rounded slightly, its more like 2.592)

Im also running G.Skill DDR2-800 RAM (at DDR2-576 right now, 1:1 multiplier), 2 gigs in dual channel mode of course, with an ATI X1650 Pro from HIS Hightech (low end graphics until I get an 8800).

 

[flasher702]

which one will give me the best OC/performance?

if you get an e4300 or e4400 you don't need DDR2-900 speeds to hit that frequency. The higher multiplier is superior unless you desperately want VT.

e4400 e6320 and e6420 come out april 22nd at which time the price on the e4300 drops. IMO there is really no point in buying e6300 e6320 or e6400 unless you found them on a really good sale. e4300 and e4400 are superior choices.

The 2m cache is the biggest difference. Allendale has a native 2m cache whereas Conroe 2m supposedly has a partially disabled cache. Other differences should be minor with possible slight improvements in manufacturing.

The tech repository article you linked is basically saying "don't lower your multiplier below stock" so.... don't. The higher multiplier is what makes the e4300 better anyway, use it. You can hit 3.2ghz on an e4300 with only 356mhz FSB which means you could use underclocked DDR2-800 and not worry about what kind of ram you pick, or do your research and buy some good DDR2-667 and possibly save some money and get lower latencies. I'm not so sure I buy the whole multiplier affecting NB clock theory though. I've OCed with the intel 875 NB before and didn't notice that problem as did a bazillion other people.

There is a more in-depth discussion of the e4300 vs. other low-end C2Ds coming out april 22nd here. e4400 and e6420 appear to be the most popular ones with the most potential as far as we know at this point.

DDR2-712 speeds should provide plenty of bandwidth at lower latencies which will give better gaming performance. Back when intel was running rambus and DDR2 while AMD was still using DDR1 intelliots would brag about their superior memory bandwidth all the time but they still got pwned in real-world tests. Only certain applications and multi-tasking environments need massive amounts of memory and IO bandwidth. And even those applications are still sensative to latency and CPU speed so sacrificing those to get more bandwidth is rarely a winning proposition.