E2140 V's E4300

[Bache]

Looking at toms cpu charts, i was supprised to see how little difference in gaming framerate there was between the E4300 and E2140.

With a price difference E2140 = $89, E4300 = $145. (E6750 = $254)

So if you wanted to build a relativelly cheap pc but still be able to play most games,etc, it would be a consideration, to use the E2140 as long as you fitted a decent graphic card eg. 6600GT.

I mean is it worth the while to have a E6750 CPU that would be practically idling along and not being used to full potential.

I would rather have the E6750 of course, but with the advent of newer cpu's and MB's every few months, it might be a idea for me to build a cheaper pc now.

Any thoughts?

 

[sharp910sh]

get the e2140 and OC to 3ghz sorted

 

[Bache]

Yes, i did a google and they OC easily to 3GHz without VCore increase

 

[gr8mikey]

Go with the cheaper cpu and spend the difference on a better graphics card. As for the overclocking to 3 GHz, I run a E2160 @ 3GHz on a Gigabyte P35 DS3L. I was able to get to 2.8 @ stock volts. Had to bump vcore to 1.4V to get 3GHz to be rock solid.

I used the O/C 2160 with ati's recently released radeon HD3850 256MB (the 512's werent available at the time) and 2GB of AData DDR2-800 RAM.

So far I have been quite pleased with the gaming performance with this setup.

 

[wrazor]

Obviuosly, the e2160 is a great value for money but you will start noticing the difference in about 8-10 months from now if games using multiple cores are released. Untill then its all nice for you

 

[Bache]

Obviuosly, the e2160 is a great value for money but you will start noticing the difference in about 8-10 months from now if games using multiple cores are released. Untill then its all nice for you

Definitly, i agree, but the value is so good for now , i'll upgrade later as we all have to do.

 

[gr8mikey]

Obviuosly, the e2160 is a great value for money but you will start noticing the difference in about 8-10 months from now if games using multiple cores are released. Untill then its all nice for you

Actually I went with the 2160 as just a placeholder until the midrange yorkfield quads start shipping around march/april. Got my eye on the Q9450! I just built my current system and had the release of the new procs had not been so imminent I would have gone with the Q6600.

 

[prodystopian]

Actually I went with the 2160 as just a placeholder until the midrange yorkfield quads start shipping around march/april. Got my eye on the Q9450! I just built my current system and had the release of the new procs had not been so imminent I would have gone with the Q6600.

+1, sort of. MY e2160 is at 3GHz and I'll be keeping it for about a year while waiting for the Penryns to drop in price. Few programs (especially games) take advantage of 4 cores currently, so what's the rush?

 

[gr8mikey]

Well, I encode quite a few movies. In addition to that I recently started participating in Folding@Home. With a quad you can get over 3000 points per day vs the max of 1700 or so points per day that my current cpu can produce.

 

[prodystopian]

Well, I encode quite a few movies. In addition to that I recently started participating in Folding@Home. With a quad you can get over 3000 points per day vs the max of 1700 or so points per day that my current cpu can produce.

I can see the rush in your case then. I was really just joking, but you bring up a great point that quads can be better even now depending on your situation.

 

[frankie_b]

Looking at toms cpu charts, i was supprised to see how little difference in gaming framerate there was between the E4300 and E2140.

With a price difference E2140 = $89, E4300 = $145. (E6750 = $254)

So if you wanted to build a relativelly cheap pc but still be able to play most games,etc, it would be a consideration, to use the E2140 as long as you fitted a decent graphic card eg. 6600GT.

I mean is it worth the while to have a E6750 CPU that would be practically idling along and not being used to full potential.

I would rather have the E6750 of course, but with the advent of newer cpu's and MB's every few months, it might be a idea for me to build a cheaper pc now.

Any thoughts?

the extra cache on the E4300 really does make a difference right across the board. if anyone's on a tight budget there are used E4300's on auction sites going dirt cheap ...

E2140 v E4300 review:
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17784493
-

 

[Grimmy]

Another thing to keep in mind about the E4300... they are being phased out. I remember I got my dad system put together. The OEM chip I got was $133 bucks. When I got my E4400, it was $126 retail, and the E4300 was $119 or so.

So the supply for it is low, which makes cost high on that or any chip by any company phasing out certain products.

 

[NaDa]

My E2160 runs at 3.447GHz with 1.5vcore. I think this is really fast and should hold you on until you need a quadcore.