Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Best Core 2 per $?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 30, 2007 3:09:45 AM

I was just wondering, which C2D do you all think has the best performance > price ratio?

E4300 ($115), E4400 ($140), E6320 ($165), E6420 (190), or E6600($225)?

And which is the best overclocker?

More about : core

May 30, 2007 3:41:04 AM

i'de say the e6600 if you plan on overclocking. on air cooling it easily will run at 3ghz, and 3.4-3.6 is usually do-able on water cooling. i have mine running at 3ghz and i must say im overly impressed with this systems performance.
May 30, 2007 3:50:14 AM

I would say E6420 if you're overclocking since most E6420 chip can overclock better than E6600 when you have a goood mobo.
Related resources
May 30, 2007 4:03:04 AM

They are all excellent overclockers, although the E6300/E6320 are the worst. I just built my brother a computer, and I gave him an E4400 since it has the highest multiplier of any of processors on that list (10x), and hence it is the easiest to overclock.
May 30, 2007 6:33:23 AM

The E4300 over the E4400. 20% increase in price for 10% better overclocking ability. However, megahert for megahert the E4400 will consume less electricity then the E4300.

July 22 the E4400 is expected to be around the price of what the E4300 currenty is. Just a thought.

For the E6xx0 series, I'd say the E6600 would be your best bet.
May 30, 2007 6:42:12 AM

Quote:
megahert for megahert the E4400 will consume less electricity then the E4300.


Really? I remember somewhere in this forum where they did a power consumption test which showed the power usage between all core2 duo e6xxxs. The power consumption increased with the model number.
May 30, 2007 9:11:33 AM

Best bang for buck is obviously the E4300, as it is half the price of the E6600 and it definitely isn't half the performance...

Overclocking wise the E6xxx will give you the best performance, but at a price premium. Again the E4300 will give the best price/performance for overclocking also.
May 30, 2007 9:44:21 AM

Quote:
megahert for megahert the E4400 will consume less electricity then the E4300.


Really? I remember somewhere in this forum where they did a power consumption test which showed the power usage between all core2 duo e6xxxs. The power consumption increased with the model number.

At stock speeds you would expect that, aye?
May 30, 2007 10:11:38 AM

Quote:
I would go for the E6320, it will easily hit 3.5ghz on air cooling

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=606&p=2

@SealBoy, E6300 are the worst for overlocking!?, so how comes Legion and Toms both wrote articles saying the E6300 is the best choice for overclocking?


It's not the worst per se, it's just the hardest to overclock due to the low 7x multiplier, which results in very high FSB and RAM speeds to get 3.5GHz. You need an excellent overclocking mobo + DDR2-1000 capable RAM.

With the E4300 you can realistically get 3GHz with a cheap mobo and DDR2-667.
May 30, 2007 11:14:43 AM

a gigabyte DS3 is $99, and I've built 3 core 2 duo (e6300) systems running generic DDR2-800, all at 3.5ghz (memory at 1000mhz) as per that legion article and they all work flawlessly

DDR2-800 is what, $10 more per GB than 667? more than worth it IMO

the extra for the E63 gives you a whole lot more bang for your buck than an E4xxx, but more money on the proc gives you diminishing returns in terms of overclocking as most E6's won't go much above 3.5ghz anyway
May 30, 2007 12:04:54 PM

E4300 is one of the best out there and excellent of overclocking for it starts with low FSB. You can get a 2x1Gb DDR2-1066 for $125 and used that for overclocking. Depending on your components and cooling you can overclocking the E4300 upwards over to 3Gb no problem. This will give the Core 2 Extreme a run for it's money. But if you can you should go ahead and choose quad core as it could last you more than the dual cores. It's not going to be long enough before the Dual cores gets phase out with the quad cores next year and more applications and DX10 games will be taking advantage and every single ounce of the cpu. Take Crysis for example, it is optimized for quad cores and soon all good games will follow. But for now I guess the E4300 will do just fine until next year. So I highly suggest for you to get that E4300 and save up the rest for the quad core upgrade.
May 30, 2007 2:21:15 PM

I got the e4400 because it is a joke to OC due to the low FSB and high CPU multiplier. It practically OCs itself. :) 

I've never done an OC before, but I got to 2.7 GHz on my first try, spending only 15 minutes doing it, and it booted on the first try and it is totally stable. I think I'll do a 3 GHz OC this weekend (on stock cooling!)

At 2.7 GHZ or 3 GHz it is fast enough to run anything out there now, and I intend to buy the Penryn quadcore (yorkfield) late next year when the prices come down.
May 31, 2007 1:43:34 AM

Weird. I remember seeing the E6x00 series running about the same power level, and the E4x00 using a bit less.
May 31, 2007 2:24:21 AM

I'd say E6320 or E6420 over the E4300/E4400 or E6600. They fill a nicer spot, IMO.
!