Is E8400 the way to go now?

[kingbrodij]

Is this processor the best bang for the buck at the moment?

tigerdirect has one for $229

After reading the Wolfdale article I would be inclined to get this over anything else.

But I guess it depends on mobo.

Comments?

 

[yomamafor1]

It really depends on your definition of "bang for the buck". For starters, if your budget range is somewhere in the sub-150 USD, your best "bang for the buck" would be an AMD X2 5000+ BE. However, if you have a hundred more for the budget, then yes, E8400 would definitely be a good choice.

If you need a good Mobo for OC, P35 should be sufficient to take you over 4Ghz, providing you have good cooling. There has been reports of errata of thermal diodes in the CPU, although you can fix it with a simple BIOS update.

 

[Thanatos421]

 

[kingbrodij]

glad im not good at math

 

[hcforde]

What will you be using it for. Then look at the benchmarks that are doing what you are doing. How long do you keep you machine? I just bought a Q6600 during Black Friday for less than $200 but idf I was in the market now the E8400 looks VERY tempting.

 

[night_wolf_in]

^this dude is high on crack

 

[Serj]

I got my Wolfdale for $189 @ Microcenter. they had an unadvertised special on these chips right when they came in last month. If you were lucky enough to know someone or get an email, you could walk away with a badass chip for roughly $200(tax included) If you already have an E67-6850 or a Q6600, there's no point really. I'd wait til they release more 8500s or maybe faster on the G0 stepping. On the other hand, if you're building a new system right now, do it! For the price, only the quad-cores at higher prices can top the chip in any apps @ stock speeds. plus running cooler = RAWK

 

[T8RR8R]

Yeah he's probably drunk like me. Weeeee!!! 6 + 9= a good time

Anyway the e8400 is really an awesome CPU for the price. Runs cool, goes fast and isn't all the expensive.

 

[Thanatos421]

The E8xxx series procs weren't meant to be anything spectacular over the 65nm series. A simple die shrink won't change much except power consumption and thermal properties. It may bring 1-2% improvement, but it's still the same uArch.

 

[yomamafor1]

I was kinda dissapointed with the benchmarks for such a highly pimped next gen processor. THG's own words:

its performance merely matched that of the 65 nm Core 2 Conroe core.

Then you must be utterly disappointed with the benchmarks for Phenom, which may I remind you, also a highly pimped next gen processor.

 

[badge]

no, you day_cat_out, i don't like crackers! Oo
i knwo that cats likke tyo climb high to get a cracker or food but i m not a cat i dont. btwe i hate pets like you

Besides spelling, you suck at the internet.

 

[quantumsheep]

I was kinda dissapointed with the benchmarks for such a highly pimped next gen processor. THG's own words:

its performance merely matched that of the 65 nm Core 2 Conroe core.

Noone was really expecting anything other than that as all it is is a die shrink.

 

[ritesh_laud]

Actually Wolfdale is faster than Conroe by 5-10% clock for clock, and much more when SSE4 is employed:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3137&p=4

On top of that it runs cooler, overclocks better, and doesn't cost more for the same clock. It's pretty much a no-brainer purchase for gamers except that supply is currently a problem and looks like it may continue to be a problem for the rest of Q1:

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5720&Itemid=1

 

[epsilon84]

I was kinda dissapointed with the benchmarks for such a highly pimped next gen processor. THG's own words:

its performance merely matched that of the 65 nm Core 2 Conroe core.

Yeah, it's pretty crappy. Performance is sorely lacking!
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/dualcore-shootout_9.html#sect0

 

[vagetaqtd]

Given the anticipated price drop of the Q6600 to $220, I don't see any point on getting the E8400 which cost around $240. There was a benchmark b/w the E8400 @ 4Ghz and the Q6600 3.6Ghz and it shows the there was minimal difference during gaming. However, apps using 4 threads kills the E8400. Just do the math:

Q6600 = Current price: $245/4 cores = $55/core
E8400 = $240/ 2 cores = $120

I think its better to own a Q6600 as it performs the same or even better with games that uses 4 cores. Not to mention the 4 threaded apps. In my opinion, the E8400 is not worth the money at $240, below $200 is a maybe, but by then the Q6600 would be around $220 which is still the most bang for your buck.

Am I wrong?

 

[badge]

Given the anticipated price drop of the Q6600 to $220, I don't see any point on getting the E8400 which cost around $240. There was a benchmark b/w the E8400 @ 4Ghz and the Q6600 3.6Ghz and it shows the there was minimal difference during gaming. However, apps using 4 threads kills the E8400. Just do the math:

Q6600 = Current price: $245/4 cores = $55/core
E8400 = $240/ 2 cores = $120

I think its better to own a Q6600 as it performs the same or even better with games that uses 4 cores. Not to mention the 4 threaded apps. In my opinion, the E8400 is not worth the money at $240, below $200 is a maybe, but by then the Q6600 would be around $220 which is still the most bang for your buck.

Am I wrong?

I have both running. The e8400 is a faster processor than the e6850 at everything to put it simply. The e6850 is faster at many things (gaming) than the q6600. Any '8' series processor is faster than a 2.4ghz '6' series processor. I'm speaking in 'general' terms. Your quad '6' series will be old news fast enough. Mine will too for that matter.

http://microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0281097

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/intel-wolfdale_6.html#sect1

 

[sailer]

My take on it is that the e8400 is a good processor for gaming for now. Six months from now and that may change a lot. But the question isn't based around six months from now.

If the computer is used for any business apps, then a quad processor becomes a better choice. Whether a person would chose a Q6600 or one from the Q9xxx series, the quad wins when trying to run complex programs or multiple programs at once. And of course there are the very few games out that will take advantage of a quad. At least, that's my 2 cents worth of opinion.