Which is faster? Con E6600 2.4 or Intel Pentium D Extreme Edition 840

[Gopic]

Can Anyone help me? Which one is faster?

I have a
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor Model BX80557E6600 - Retail

but I just got a Intel Extreme Edition 840 Dual Core 3.2 Ghz LGA 775 EE

Should I stick with the Duo E6600 Or Go with the bottom one.

Any Ideas? Thanks

 

[JonathanDeane]

Probably the E6600 unless your doing video encoding then the P4 might have an advantage (not sure as you can tell lol)

 

[eodeo]

Core2 All the way. Netburst is pathetic compared to it. It would have to run on 10ghz to be comparable to core 2 line.

In conclusion, stick with e6600.

 

[50bmg]

+1 for E6600

Besides, all the pentium cpus, especially the Ds, have problems with heat and power consumtion.

 

[rubix_1011]

The pentium D's were horrible...overheated like mad and underperformed like a 30 year marriage.

 

[Reynod]

Actually the EE was a great bit of silicon for certain tasks ... like encoding.

The E6600 however is easy to overclock it a bit ... and when overclocked it really punches out the numbers in terms of performance across a range of tasks.

Once you have it over 3Ghz you have a fairly gutsy PC.

I'd tend to recommend it as such ... since you havn't told us what the PC is mainly used for.

Check out the charts for yourself.

 

[Gopic]

Wow so basically its a crappy chip?

 

[KyleSTL]

Netburst is extremely inefficient. The two-Prescotts-in-a-single-CPU-package was horrible (they've done much better with two Core 2s in a package to make a quad core).

I'd venture to say there isn't a single app in which the PD would be faster.
E6600 is recommended 100%.

 

[Reynod]

Well no it isn't crap - either will still be fine for genral computing tasks.

The core2 is more efficient ... runs cooler ... chews a lot less power too.

The EE might be fine as a dedicated box for a very narrow band of applications - check these out for yourself.

Hence I'd recommend the E6600 and a bit of a simple tweak ...

Good luck

 

[sorce7200]

here is a hint:

http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/462-overclocking-world-record.html

this for the 6600 quad....
I run one o.c.'d to 3.6 Ghz and 'whooosh' it is quick....

 

[njalterio]

What amazes me is that even with people going on about IPC 3ghz is still lodged in people's mind as some magic number you have to reach to get decent performance.

not a go at anyone, just seeing reynod mention it reminds me of how much you see it around the forum, back when i got this pc and even to day 2.2ghz was fast enough and a core2duo is even faster clock for clock so why still this fixation with 3ghz?

If you can get your processor to clock at 3 GHz or greater then that means you reached the performance level of the really high end chip.
If you bought a Q6600 and were able to get it to 3.0 GHz than you are getting amazing value. $1000 performance for $200. If you got your Q6600 to 3.2 GHz than you are getting $1500 performance for $200.

It's not that a computer suddenly becomes amazing at 3 GHz, but it reaches the performance level of the high end stuff at stock.

 

[Reynod]

Well considering the core2 line seems to run well at 3Ghz without much in the way of overvolting the CPU then I think there is your answer.

The extreme line runs (top retail chips) at around 3 - 3.2 Ghz so that's the "magic number" for getting great value ($140 chip produces results similar to a $1200 chip).

I think your right for general purpose computing - 2 vs 3 ghz makes no difference.

The thing is many of those asking for advice are gamers ... that kind of speed difference (providing you have decent graphics power) does make a difference if you have the display to hande it.

3Ghz isn't the "magic number" for an AMD based gaming system though ... it is really the "minimum needed" ... for a decent gaming box ... and I say that as an AMD fan.

 

[Shadow703793]

E6600. The Core based line up OC very well with the correct motherboards/RAM/cooling.

FYI: To confirm why many refer to the 3Ghz OC consider that the E2180($65-70)@ 3.2Ghz reaches the same as E6600(~$200+ when released) in most benchmarks.

 

[Shadow703793]

True. Why not OC when you can get free performance ?

(note: there are cases when OCing doesn't make sense ie. like in a server)

 

[gamerk316]

My old Pentium D caused parts of my motherboard to melt. Do you REALLY want one of those?

 

[Gopic]

Hey Guys this is great, I appreciate the responses! Ok so I stick with my Orginal chip Now I have a:

ASUS P5N32-E SLI LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI ATX Intel Motherboard
4 x - CORSAIR XMS2 1GB 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model TWIN2X2048-6400
2 x XFX PVT80GGHF4 GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB 320-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported

How can I shoot it to 3 GIGS or so without burning my motherboard? Anyone have the right settings of th ebios I can go off of? I have tried everything. I am terrible at this overclock and stats thing

 

[Shadow703793]

Can you post a pic of your BIOS? Also what is your CPU VID?

 

[Gopic]

ASUS P5N32-E SLI LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI ATX

4 x - CORSAIR XMS2 1GB 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model TWIN2X2048-6400

2 x XFX PVT80GGHF4 GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB 320-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported

Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz LGA 775

800WATT Therm

I will pst a screenshot as soon as I get home. Thanks for this. Which screen do you need to see?

 

[rubix_1011]

3ghz with a CoreDuo is very different from the early days of P3/P4 and AMD races...the coveted 1ghz and above mark. It isn't as linear as it used to be, clock speeds DO matter, but when you are doing x-amount more work per clock, you can do the same work at lower speeds, less heat and less power (generally speaking).

 

[anthropophaginian]

The E6600 will perform much better than that pentium D. You can effectively double the the clockspeed of a core2duo of that era when comparing to an 800 series pentium D to get an idea of what you're comparing. So think of 4.8GHz vs 3.2GHz (for a general idea).

 

[Shadow703793]

I will pst a screenshot as soon as I get home. Thanks for this. Which screen do you need to see?

Post the screen with FSB,voltage, RAM,etc settings.

 

[anthropophaginian]

Hey Guys this is great, I appreciate the responses! Ok so I stick with my Orginal chip Now I have a:

ASUS P5N32-E SLI LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI ATX Intel Motherboard
4 x - CORSAIR XMS2 1GB 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model TWIN2X2048-6400
2 x XFX PVT80GGHF4 GeForce 8800 GTS 320MB 320-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported

How can I shoot it to 3 GIGS or so without burning my motherboard? Anyone have the right settings of th ebios I can go off of? I have tried everything. I am terrible at this overclock and stats thing

I think overclocking settings are under "Jumper free configuration" on the asus boards. 3GHz is probably very possible on that board but always check for stability before staying with your settings.

 

[quantumsheep]

Core2 All the way. Netburst is pathetic compared to it. It would have to run on 10ghz to be comparable to core 2 line.

In conclusion, stick with e6600.

You smoking crack? I have a Pentium D930 in one of my rigs at 4.2ghz and it's faster than a fair few core 2 duo chips especially at certain tasks. Roughly a C2D is about 1.85 times faster clock to clock than a Netburst dual core.

 

[shadowthor]

core 2 duo, is faster and more efficient (power wise).

 

[Gopic]

Umm damn... How do I take screenshots of bios? Sory for askin a newb question