I am planning to get the Intel Pentium Dual Core E2180 Dual Core and over clock it to 2.7ghz at least but everyone I talked to says it is a crap cpu since it has low cache and that it will hinder all the other parts that I am planning to get.
I seen bench marks showing over clocking that it can compete with the top dual cores and also I hear in game play if your using a higher resolution its more on your graphic card not your cpu.
They say it's not the amount of cache that matters... but how you use it... kidding!
*ahem*
The E2180 is a good choice if you are on a budget. Sure, the larger cache CPUs would be better, but at a cost.
If you want to save a few extra bucks, some cheaper RAM would do the trick as well. You don't really need expensive RAM when overclocking C2Ds, the minimal performance gains aren't really worth it IMO. With the money saved on the RAM, you can afford a better CPU, such as an E4500 for example.
I'm running E1260@3GHz, HD3870 and 2GB DDR2 800MHz CL4. I did some CPU benchmarks using Windows performance logs (playing full screen) because I was also worried if 1MB cache is enough. I checked Crysis, COD4 and Lost Planet (always 1280x1024, high or maxed details, no AA, no AF). CPU usage in my tests is about 70%-80%. It means to me that the CPU is more than enough for now. I was able to get over 90% usage in Crysis CPU benchmark HIGH@800x600, but I'm not sure one plays in such settings.
the tests I've seen put the performance difference at about 200mhz, ie
4mb 2.6 = 2mb 2.8 = 1mb 3.0
the 21xx overclock very well, my e2140 is sitting at 2.8 (8x350) with 1.325v, 60c load with stock hs/fan.
I agree about the cheap ram, you don't need expensive ram until you go over 1600 fsb, which you likely won't. my adata was $35 after mir and is at 840 4-4-4-12 2.0v use the money saved on an e4xxx or even better the 3870 with 512mb ram if you can.
the tests I've seen put the performance difference at about 200mhz, ie
4mb 2.6 = 2mb 2.8 = 1mb 3.0
the 21xx overclock very well, my e2140 is sitting at 2.8 (8x350) with 1.325v, 60c load with stock hs/fan.
I agree about the cheap ram, you don't need expensive ram until you go over 1600 fsb, which you likely won't. my adata was $35 after mir and is at 840 4-4-4-12 2.0v use the money saved on an e4xxx or even better the 3870 with 512mb ram if you can.
sorry to re-open this question but I've been wondering the same thing, especially since the new 6mb cache E8xxx series processors.
Based on your statement above: 6mb 2.4 = [b][i]4mb 2.6 = 2mb 2.8 = 1mb 3.0??
If I understand correctly then an E2160 overclocked to above 3Ghz will roughly be the same as a non overclocked E8200??? Does that apply to gaming performance? My friend wants to build a system but buy a budget cpu for now and then upgrade straight to 45nm quads once they come out and prices drop a little bit. He'll be using an X38 motherboard, with an HD3870 (upgrade to 2 of them later on)... Will the cpu performance be negligible enough to tolerate for about 6-8 months in newer games such as COD4, and Bioshock???[/i][/b]
the tests I've seen put the performance difference at about 200mhz, ie
4mb 2.6 = 2mb 2.8 = 1mb 3.0
the 21xx overclock very well, my e2140 is sitting at 2.8 (8x350) with 1.325v, 60c load with stock hs/fan.
I agree about the cheap ram, you don't need expensive ram until you go over 1600 fsb, which you likely won't. my adata was $35 after mir and is at 840 4-4-4-12 2.0v use the money saved on an e4xxx or even better the 3870 with 512mb ram if you can.
depending on the apps but correct - about ~200mhz difference...
just to make myself feel much better about this before going on recommending to my friend.
An E2160 (assuming I can successfully overclock above 3.0Ghz) will show an INSIGNIFICANT loss in performance during "modern" gaming when compared to stock rated processors of 2.6Ghz or lower with 4 or even 6 mb of cache????????????????? again, rest of the system will consist of XMS2 DDR2800 ram, x38 mobo (not sure which one yet), and an HD3870 gpu... On a side note, if you can tell me which X38 mobo is good based on cost/performance ratio I would appreciate it.
sorry for repeating the same thing again, but it just seems a little too unbelievable that an overclocked 70 dollar processor can perform to the level of stock 200+ dollar processors.
From a test with same speed cpu (over and underclock) but each time different cache seemed to be a big influence in gaming fps. More than CPU Ghz. Don't remember where but it was a dual core, maybe you could google it?
More in some games than others, but the fact it can keep things it uses often in cache speeds things up.
Message edited by tjoepie on 02-25-2008 at 10:54:37 AM
RZO, every app will be different, but in modern gaming, the major factor is the graphics board. In general, any reasonable CPU (Core2Duo design running 2+ GHz) will power a good graphics card well enough so the CPU is not the bottleneck in performance. Of course, not every e2xxx will OC to 200% of its rated speed, and by OCing the CPU warranty is voided, and you need to spend many hours testing to determine that a given OC is stable enough for use. Thus, most people spend more on the CPU in order not to have to deal with those hassles. Finally, in historical terms, this is an unusual occurrence: "normally," CPUs are not so overclockable. In this case, it's just that Intel has such a good design that most of the e2xxx's they sell end up being "artificially" set to run at lower default FSBs. Essentially, they took a 3GHz/1333MHz design and set the FSB back to 800MHz; that doesn't make it not work anymore at 3GHz/1333MHz. A similar situation happened with the Pentium D 805, which was a 3+GHz/800MHz design artificially set to 533MHz FSB.
Message edited by Mondoman on 02-25-2008 at 11:59:07 AM
---------------
e2160@3GHz: OCing my way to Ubuntuland!
Why doesn't matter if you buy expensive to cheap RAM?
I had no idea.
Cheapo ram has higher latency, but core processors don't really mind that. I got some cheap ass corsair ddr2 800, with 4-4-4-12 timings. If i moved to some really snazzy ddr2 it would cost twice the price and give me like 3% extra performance, and that was if I really oc'd the living sh#te out of the cpu.
Honestly ddr2 800 with 4-4-4-12 timings or better is all you will ever need.
thanks, I should probably start a new thread for this but since I'm already in here... let me know if you want me to move it!
The whole reason for my asking is simple. Right now my friend is on a fairly tight budget, but in 6-8 months he'll be able to spend much more money on parts... so I wanted to build him a system that's sub 500 USD right now, and have him buy a new CPU, or even a new CPU/mobo later on... Given the prices the following is what i have decided to purchase:
GA-P35-DS3L: 80.00
E2160: 70.00
HD3870: 190.00
Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800: 35.00
***Everything else he's recycling from a previous system...
What kind of performance can he expect in recent games such as bioshock/COD4/crysis, etc????? Assuming again that the 2160 can be OC'd to at least 2.8Ghz... Anyone have a similar system that can post their results would be greatly appreciated! His display has a max resolution of 1440x900... Will their be a significant boost in performance with a better cpu or motherboard? He doesn't mind spending an extra 200.00 for either if the performance is THAT much better... but also note that if he spends more, he won't be willing to OC the processor right away... Also, are any of the other sub 150 P35 boards ALOT better at overclocking then the one listed above????
Again, I'll probably start a new thread just so I can get as much input as possible, but anything you guys can tell me will be much appreciated!
Cheapo ram has higher latency, but core processors don't really mind that. I got some cheap ass corsair ddr2 800, with 4-4-4-12 timings. If i moved to some really snazzy ddr2 it would cost twice the price and give me like 3% extra performance, and that was if I really oc'd the living sh#te out of the cpu.
Honestly ddr2 800 with 4-4-4-12 timings or better is all you will ever need.
RZO - get at least the DS3R version of that MB. It only costs about $30 more and has lots of ports and RAID; beside that, it's always a pain upgrading MBs later, as you have to reinstall Windows, etc.
---------------
e2160@3GHz: OCing my way to Ubuntuland!
I think Toms or Anandtech did a cache size review and it ends up being at most a 10% boost in some apps so if your on a budget as long as it has 1 or more megs of cache you should be ok.
