Tom's Hardware Forums » CPU & Components » CPUs » E8200 vs E8400
 

E8200 vs E8400

Add a reply



 Word :   Username :  
 
Bottom
Author
 Thread : E8200 vs E8400
 
Profile: stranger
More Information

Hi,
 
Trying to choose which CPU I'm going for in my Alienware rig (Area-51 7500). Trying to decide on which of these two I'll go for:
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E8200 2.66GHz 6MB Cache 1333MHz FSB    
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E8400 3.00GHz 6MB Cache 1333MHz FSB  
 
Just wondering just how much difference there is between the two.
 
Thanks guys

Related Pr oduct
Register or log in to remove.

Profile: Ancient Poster
More Information

Nox41 wrote :

Hi,

 

Trying to choose which CPU I'm going for in my Alienware rig (Area-51 7500). Trying to decide on which of these two I'll go for:
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E8200 2.66GHz 6MB Cache 1333MHz FSB  
Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E8400 3.00GHz 6MB Cache 1333MHz FSB  

 

Just wondering just how much difference there is between the two.

 

Thanks guys

 


I haven't looked it up, but since e8200's clocked lower at the same fsb, looks like it's running on lower multiplier.


---------------
Q6600@3.6ghz, GA-EX38-DS4 X38 chipset motherboard, 8gb 800mhz ddr2 4-3-3-12, 8800GTS(g92)@780mhz, 1TB 7200rpm 32mb cache hdd, 850watt 12v rails=4x20amp powersupply
There was a dream that was Rome...
Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information

Nox41 wrote :

Hi,

 

Trying to choose which CPU I'm going for in my Alienware rig (Area-51 7500). Trying to decide on which of these two I'll go for:
Intel® Core%u2122 2 Duo E8200 2.66GHz 6MB Cache 1333MHz FSB  
Intel® Core%u2122 2 Duo E8400 3.00GHz 6MB Cache 1333MHz FSB  

 

Just wondering just how much difference there is between the two.

 

Thanks guys

 

If you dont plan to OC I would consider the 8400 worth it over the 8200 if the price difference isnt ridiculous. But even if you do plan to OC the 8400 has a 9x multi which will allow lower FSB increases so you will be able to get higher with it. I personally would go with the 8400. Hope this helps!

 

Best,

 

3Ball

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by 3Ball on 04-20-2008 at 07:25:57 PM

---------------
ABIT AB9 Pro P965 Motherboard
Intel C2D E6420 @ 3.40ghz w/ (8x425mhz, 1.4125v, Zalman 9500 & 24+ Hours Orthos Stable)
(2x2048mb) G. Skill DDR2 8000 @ 850mhz w/ (4-4-4-12: 2T, 2.1v)
VisionTek HD4870 512mb @ Stock (Just Ordered lol)
Profile: Ancient Poster
More Information

3Ball wrote :

If you dont plan to OC I would consider the 8400 worth it over the 8200 if the price difference isnt ridiculous.

 

Best,

 

3Ball

 


Not really, higher multiplier can be an advantage if your motherboard's fsb is the bottleneck.


---------------
Q6600@3.6ghz, GA-EX38-DS4 X38 chipset motherboard, 8gb 800mhz ddr2 4-3-3-12, 8800GTS(g92)@780mhz, 1TB 7200rpm 32mb cache hdd, 850watt 12v rails=4x20amp powersupply
Ironhide: Why are we fighting to save the humans?
Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information

A price list here :
E8200 = 8x333 = 2660MHz : 145 EUR
E8400 = 9x333 = 3000MHz : 185 EUR
Q6600 = 9x266 = 2400MHz : 205 EUR
 
If you don't plan to overclock E8400 is a better choice.
But at that price point I'd start looking at the Q6600 for 205 EUR.  
 
If you are on a budget E8200 is a great pick.  
In ideal (benchmark) cases it would be around 11% slower than E8400.
In real life it's slower but not by much.

Profile: Ancient Poster
More Information

Andrius wrote :

A price list here :
E8200 = 8x333 = 2660MHz : 145 EUR
E8400 = 9x333 = 3000MHz : 185 EUR
Q6600 = 9x266 = 2400MHz : 205 EUR

 

If you don't plan to overclock E8400 is a better choice.
But at that price point I'd start looking at the Q6600 for 205 EUR.

 

If you are on a budget E8200 is a great pick.
In ideal (benchmark) cases it would be around 11% slower than E8400.
In real life it's slower but not by much.

 


All those e8400 fanboys say it's better than quad because it overclocks higher. :p


---------------
Q6600@3.6ghz, GA-EX38-DS4 X38 chipset motherboard, 8gb 800mhz ddr2 4-3-3-12, 8800GTS(g92)@780mhz, 1TB 7200rpm 32mb cache hdd, 850watt 12v rails=4x20amp powersupply
Profile: addict
More Information

If you have the money I think the E8400 is the ticket, faster and easier to find. The E8500 is a joke, 90 dollars more for 160mhz, no thanks. The E8200 is a great buy and hard to beat for the price, that is why they are hard to find. I personally would buy the 8400 simply because it's faster and only 30.00 difference. Then again I don't have the patience to wait for an 8200, everytime it is in somewhere it sells out immediately.

Ironhide: Why are we fighting to save the humans?
Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information

dagger wrote :

All those e8400 fanboys say it's better than quad because it overclocks higher. :p


 
Fanboys always say they have the best.
I'm a quadcore fanboy. I have more transistors to play with! :bounce:
 
Or as Sean Connery said in "The Rock".
Dual core users(/Losers) always whine about their best. Quad core users(/Winners)  go home and do(/fsck) the best (/prom queen) :kaola:.

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by Andrius on 04-20-2008 at 08:37:55 PM
Monkey wants to steal peaches
Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Andrius wrote :

Fanboys always say they have the best.
I'm a quadcore fanboy. I have more transistors to play with! :bounce:
 
Or as Sean Connery said in "The Rock".
Dual core users(/Losers) always whine about their best. Quad core users(/Winners)  go home and do(/fsck) the best (/prom queen) :kaola:.


I have both, E8400 seems faster. :whistle:


---------------
Forums are like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhoea -- massive, difficult to  
redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement  
when you least expect it.
Profile: Faithful Poster
More Information

I dont think the problem is picking a CPU.
 
Why get an Alienware that costs 100s if not 1000s more then you would pay else where.
 
Build yourself or look for a custom builder on Ebay.
 
For the cost of Alienware you could prolly get a q9650 with good sli graphics.
 
I got some ALienware cases if its all about the looks.


Message edited by roadrunner 197069 on 04-20-2008 at 09:20:36 PM
Ironhide: Why are we fighting to save the humans?
Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information

mousemonkey wrote :

I have both, E8400 seems faster. :whistle:


 
Supreme Commander says otherwise. I don't play other games.
Single threaded applications are faster on E8400.
My system during a normal "work session" has 65-75 processes.
The last dualcore I had was an E6300 overclocked to 2.8GHz.
Compared to that ... Q6600 is a different beast.
 
My A64 3200+ "seemed faster" than my Pentium D 920.
With the Q6xxx and Q9xxx dualcores have become the "budget" sollutions (or for gamers).
 
That's why I'm a quadcore fanboy. :D

Monkey wants to steal peaches
Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

Andrius wrote :

Supreme Commander says otherwise. I don't play other games.


And I don't play Supreme Commander I play other games which say otherwise :kaola: .


---------------
Forums are like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhoea -- massive, difficult to  
redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement  
when you least expect it.
Profile: Ancient Poster
More Information

mousemonkey wrote :

And I don't play Supreme Commander I play other games which say otherwise  :kaola:  .

 


In a couple of years, the games that say otherwise won't be around anymore. :kaola:


---------------
Q6600@3.6ghz, GA-EX38-DS4 X38 chipset motherboard, 8gb 800mhz ddr2 4-3-3-12, 8800GTS(g92)@780mhz, 1TB 7200rpm 32mb cache hdd, 850watt 12v rails=4x20amp powersupply
Profile: old hand
More Information

the bottom line is, Build it your self.

Ironhide: Why are we fighting to save the humans?
Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information

mousemonkey wrote :

And I don't play Supreme Commander I play other games which say otherwise :kaola: .


 
So basicly you're telling me I'm right. :D
I also agree, for current gaming(except SC which is the only game I played since DOW DC) a higher clocked dual core is better. For extreme multitasking/CAD/programming/FPGA compilation/content creation (basicly everything I do) quad is the "smarter" choice.

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by Andrius on 04-20-2008 at 11:45:12 PM
Ironhide: Why are we fighting to save the humans?
Profile: nimble knuckle
More Information

dobby wrote :

the bottom line is, Build it your self.


 
If money is not an issue why would he?
A system integrator like Alienware offers prestige for a price.
No "will it smoke" lottery. And what counts most to some people, it comes ready to play.
This forum is full of people who built themselves and have issues.
 
For us poor working people/enthusiasts it is the only way.

Boldly going where no man has gone before
Profile: enthusiast
More Information

Nox41 wrote :

Hi,
 
Trying to choose which CPU I'm going for in my Alienware rig (Area-51 7500).


 
You are a moron.


---------------
| Q6600 @ 3.2 GHz | Maximus Extreme @ 400 MHz | HD3870 GDDR4 @ 850/1301 MHz | 2GB DDR3 @ 1600 MHz | X-Fi Fatal1ty Professional | ATI Theater 650 | 500GB 7200 rpm | Zalman 9700 | Tagan BZ 1100W | Thermaltake Armor |
Monkey wants to steal peaches
Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information

dagger wrote :

In a couple of years, the games that say otherwise won't be around anymore. :kaola:


The same can be said of my current gaming  :lol:


---------------
Forums are like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhoea -- massive, difficult to  
redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement  
when you least expect it.
Monkey wants to steal peaches
Profile: Honorary Poster
More Information