Confused on cpu differences! e4300 vs. e6400

[dude_here]

Some are telling me to get an e4300, but have been looking at an e6400 and I'm not sure why. Isn't the 6400 a newer chip and wouldn't that be better?

Head spinning!

 

[jackxlj]

the e4300 is actualy the newer of the two, the 6400 has the higher stock performance, but the e4300 is the better bang for dollar overclocker

 

[sanjiwatsuki]

If you're overclocking then go for the E4300 if you're not going to try and be the very best like no one ever was.

If you're overclocking and want to hit up past 3.6ghz then go for the E6400.

If you're not overclocking at all go for the E6400.

 

[dude_here]

I just want a CPU that will last for a couple of years without being a total boat anchor. Don't laugh, but am still using an AMD Athlon XP 2100+ as I type this. I guess anything at this point will seem like warp drive compared! :lol:

 

[1Tanker]

I just want a CPU that will last for a couple of years without being a total boat anchor. Don't laugh, but am still using an AMD Athlon XP 2100+ as I type this. I guess anything at this point will seem like warp drive compared! :lol:

Well, then in your case, check this.

E6400:

Pro
-Better "stock" performance".
-Likely better to overclock "to the limit" (meaning higher potential overall speed).
-VT

Con
-requires DDR2-533 minimum, and DDR2-800 if overclocked.
-higher initial cost.
-for overclocking, needs a mobo that's capable of hitting 400FSB+


E4300:

Pro
-can overclock to 2.4GHz(nearly E6600 perfromance) with DDR2-533.
-lower initial cost than E6400(and still slightly cheaper than E6300).
-can be overclocked to 3GHz using DDR2-667 and without having to have a great O/Cing mobo.(except with the VIA/i865 chipsets...max 300FSB=2.7ghz).

Con
-lack of VT (majority will not miss this).
-in many cases, the price is very close to E6300 prices(but this should be corrected with the next round of price-cuts).
-slighly lower "stock" performance than E6300
-considerable less performance tha E6400 @ stock frequencies.

So, make a list, and check-mark the things that matter to you most.
If you aren't going to overclock, the E6400 is the best choice. If you are going to overclock, both are great choices, but equipment requirements are
lower(and likely cheaper) for overclocking the E4300.

Either chip will be a huge upgrade from your 2100+. GL

 

[dude_here]

Thanks! Sounds like I want the 6400 (would get a 660 if I could afford it!)

Anything else I should know? ANY advice will be GREATLY appreciated!!!

 

[Centurion]

I just want a CPU that will last for a couple of years without being a total boat anchor. Don't laugh, but am still using an AMD Athlon XP 2100+ as I type this. I guess anything at this point will seem like warp drive compared! :lol:

Well, then in your case, check this.

E4300:

Pro
-can overclock to 2.4GHz(nearly E6600 perfromance) with DDR2-533.
-lower initial cost than E6400(and still slightly cheaper than E6300).
-can be overclocked to 3GHz using DDR2-667 and without having to have a great O/Cing mobo.(except with the VIA/i865 chipsets...max 300FSB=2.7ghz).
...

Just fyi, with my cheapo Asrock 775Dual-VSTA ($50 or so) I am running an E4300 at 2.4 with PC3200 memory, stock cooling fan.

The E4300 is a bit overpriced due to demand right now probably (I paid 175 for mine from newegg, free shipping, now $169+free shipping) but as all have said, the price drops will make this upgrade <$175 for cpu+motherboard in the near future.

If you want better overclocking potential, you would have to get a better mb, but imho, the upgrade with an e4300 after the price drops is a no brainer (if you are getting the cheap mb). seriously, if you need to upgrade at anytime in the future after this purchase, just save $20/month, you can jump to another level with 200-300 bucks every year.

People have gotten an e4300 to 3.7Ghz+ with air cooling supposedly,
here at nordichardware

Just type e4300 overclocking in google, see what the results are. Either cpu is a great choice.

Centurion

 

[SuperFly03]

E4300:

Pro
-can overclock to 2.4GHz(nearly E6600 perfromance) with DDR2-533.
-lower initial cost than E6400(and still slightly cheaper than E6300).
-can be overclocked to 3GHz using DDR2-667 and without having to have a great O/Cing mobo.(except with the VIA/i865 chipsets...max 300FSB=2.7ghz).

Con
-lack of VT (majority will not miss this).
-in many cases, the price is very close to E6300 prices(but this should be corrected with the next round of price-cuts).
-slighly lower "stock" performance than E6300
-considerable less performance tha E6400 @ stock frequencies.

This is a critical point. I have an E4300 and a RD600 (most configurable mobo in existence) and it has taken 3 unique options for me to get my E4300 over ~345 FSB. I spent 3 days tweakin this little SOB to 375 FSB stable.... I still think I can get 400, but it is going to be a real challenge.

Easy OC to about 280FSB with almost any mainstream mobo probably. Though it is possible to just get a crappy chip.

So an E4300 is a great bargain for those willing to put in the time, and has OK stock performance. So, for a newb OC the 6 series is better (note newb is not offensive in this case, just meaning a nonseasoned OC'er 8) ).

I would go 6 series...... (I feel as if I am talking about beemers or nvidia saying 6 series..... lol)

 

[jackxlj]

the rd600 is a board for experianced ocers...theres other boards you can buy, that will let you hit 333mhz fsb with te e4300 easier

 

[SuperFly03]

the rd600 is a board for experianced ocers...theres other boards you can buy, that will let you hit 333mhz fsb with te e4300 easier

I agree, though 310 may be more typical. There is nothing wrong with those boards, but just don't expect to get every ounce of speed from the E4300 with them. That was my only point.

I rarely recommend DFI boards ... except to people I know who can handle it.

ASUS and Gigabyte both make excellent boards for C2D. 8)