Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

E8400 or E7600, No OC! Which is good & why?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Core
  • Cache
Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 8, 2010 4:34:13 PM

hi guys,


Which one is good,Core 2 duo e8400 or Core 2 Duo e7600.E7600has high clock but lower cache only 3mb ,e8400has 6mb of cache and 1333fsb.Which one is good and is there any use for high amount of cache?

Thanks!

More about : e8400 e7600 good

a b à CPUs
April 9, 2010 12:44:30 AM

the fsb has really small impact on perf, id say go for the e7, e8 is mostly for the heavy overclocking set
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2010 1:35:47 AM

E8400 is better. The cache makes it faster than the small clock difference.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2010 2:08:58 AM

I wouldn't get either one for a new build. Get a new AM3 build. LGA775 *is* DEAD.
m
0
l
April 9, 2010 2:55:47 AM

Shadow703793 said:
I wouldn't get either one for a new build. Get a new AM3 build. LGA775 *is* DEAD.



This is not for a new build,Its just for an upgrade!
m
0
l
a c 172 à CPUs
April 9, 2010 2:58:39 AM

E8400 is faster. E7600 is cheaper.
E8400 will probably OC better.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2010 3:17:03 AM

Aneesh@4GHz said:
This is not for a new build,Its just for an upgrade!

lol. In that case, how much are you planning to spend?
m
0
l
April 9, 2010 3:30:33 AM

I have two in my budget

e8400 and the e7600

Which should i choose?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2010 5:54:09 AM

I think they are both the same exact cores but one has more cache am I correct? Doubt you will notice a huge difference unless you keep them stock.
m
0
l
April 9, 2010 7:56:25 AM

Is there any use for the 6mb cache? 1333fsb with 6mb cache and 1066fsb with 3mb cache?

Is there any importance to fsb?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2010 12:17:50 PM

Get the cheaper one.

Why don't you OC?

m
0
l
April 9, 2010 1:04:33 PM

shubham1401 said:
Get the cheaper one.

Why don't you OC?



Cheaper one?Both of this have a small difference in price at my place.Thats why i am in trouble.I dont want to oc because i dont need to kill the warranty!
m
0
l
a c 105 à CPUs
April 9, 2010 1:17:23 PM

if the price is the same get the e8400

if you can use the extra cash, get the e7600
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2010 2:05:41 PM

If you're not overclocking it, the E7600 will be faster, the higher clock speed is more beneficial than the extra 3MB of L2 apart from gaming, where the cache helps a lot, and WinRAR compression.

Here is a comparison on AnandTech, between the E7500 and E8300, which have 100MHz difference, while there is a 67Mhz difference between the E7600 and E8400. Thus the performance difference between the E7600 and E8400 will be smaller, but bear in mind that the E7600 will cost $23 USD less at newegg:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/87?vs=57

But if you can get them for the same price, or may plan to overclock in the future, get the E8400 instead.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 9, 2010 2:43:28 PM

^+1.

Both are good processors.
But the higher clock speed of E7600 will benefit more.
m
0
l
April 10, 2010 2:26:54 AM

I think e8400 is 3000mhz and the e7600 is 3060mhz,Does the 60mhz increase in clock benifit more?or the extra 3mb cache on e8400 benifit more?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2010 3:38:01 AM

Aneesh@4GHz said:
I think e8400 is 3000mhz and the e7600 is 3060mhz,Does the 60mhz increase in clock benifit more?or the extra 3mb cache on e8400 benifit more?


The slightly higher clock speed will help more in most applications, except games where large caches help, as well as things like WinRAR compression.

m
0
l
a c 131 à CPUs
April 10, 2010 3:43:34 AM

Lmeow said:
The slightly higher clock speed will help more in most applications, except games where large caches help, as well as things like WinRAR compression.

Seriously dude, 0.06GHz.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2010 5:43:09 AM

enzo matrix said:
Seriously dude, 0.06GHz.


I agree with you, however, the cache makes the difference. You will notice differences in the FPS in some games... not from the .06 speed diff though.
m
0
l
April 10, 2010 6:30:25 AM

More cache is better, especially when you're talking about clock speeds that close together. The e8400 is the better processor any way you look at it. The only thing that matters is how much you want to spend and what you'll be doing with it. If you have the money go for the e8400, if you want to save a little get the e7600. I honestly don't think most people would see much of a difference between the two though.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2010 7:41:58 AM

0.06GHz does make a performance difference - look at the difference between the E7500 and E8300, which have a 0.1GHz difference, I'd say the majority the E7500 beat the E8300, and only the large cache helped in games and things of the sort. 0.06GHz is a bit over half of 0.1GHz, thus the performance difference will be smaller, but there will still be a performance difference in favour of the E7600. If he were to overclock, I'd definitely recommend the E8400, but considering he's not - the E7600 is a better choice.

The E7500 vs E8300 benchmark:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/57?vs=87
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2010 8:27:02 AM

Oops.
I thought E7600 is 3.33Ghz.
My bad.

E8400 will be a better buy in this case.
m
0
l
a c 131 à CPUs
April 10, 2010 3:04:16 PM

Lmeow said:
0.06GHz does make a performance difference - look at the difference between the E7500 and E8300, which have a 0.1GHz difference, I'd say the majority the E7500 beat the E8300, and only the large cache helped in games and things of the sort. 0.06GHz is a bit over half of 0.1GHz, thus the performance difference will be smaller, but there will still be a performance difference in favour of the E7600. If he were to overclock, I'd definitely recommend the E8400, but considering he's not - the E7600 is a better choice.

The E7500 vs E8300 benchmark:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/57?vs=87

Uhhh... fail? In that benchmark there appears to be hardly any difference. The things the E7500 does beat the 0.1GHz slower E8300 in is by 6.6%. And that is only in one test. The others where the E7500 wins is 2% or less.
Alternatively, negating games, the E8300 wins by a greater margin in the tests that are not close.
There is a 3.5% clockspeed difference between the two. Therefore, there would be about a 2.5% clockspeed difference if the E8300 were upped to make the difference between the two 0.06MHz. This actually seems to negate or tie the majority of tests performed with the E7500 being faster.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2010 6:05:19 PM

This is such a dumb thread at this point... we all know the E8400 rapes the other processor but if the guy does not play games or encode/photoshop a lot then the E7600 will suffice UNLESS there is a very slim price difference.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2010 9:41:37 PM

Why put a V8 in a golf cart?
m
0
l
a c 158 à CPUs
April 10, 2010 10:24:31 PM

Since you are not overclocking you will benefit from the extra cache and faster fsb speed of the e8400, it won't be much though and only if you get fast memory (1333+) to match.
m
0
l
April 10, 2010 10:38:09 PM

It's $23. I could easily spend that much buying soda at the convenience store 20 oz. at a time... in a week. I'm sure you'd be able to fit it into your budget.

Get the E8400. If you ever decide to O/C, it's a beast. I was able to fiddle it past 4.0 ghz with stock cooling (stable) and past 4.2 ghz easily with a decent cooler.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2010 10:57:26 PM

E8400 is significantly better in games and cache intensive apps due to its much larger L2 cache! I would get E8400 if the price difference between the two CPUs is small.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 12, 2010 6:55:29 AM

You know you can probably get a Q9300 for about the price of a E8400 if you looked at the right places. For certain things, like video editing, it is certainly a better bet, unless you Mobo doesn't support it.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 12, 2010 2:44:07 PM

Q8400 cost $5 more than E8400 at newegg.

Q9550 sold at Mircrocenter costs about the same as E8400/Q8400 sold at newegg.
m
0
l
!