E7200 vs e6550 gaming

Status
Not open for further replies.
Solution
First, the difference between 3 and 4 MB of L2 cache is relatively insignificant. Second, performance does not scale linearly with FSB frequency.

Neither will wipe out the speed advantage that the faster E7200 has.

Third, the E7200 is based on the 45 nm Wolfdale core which on a clock per clock basis is about 10% more efficient than the 65 nm Conroe core.

Fourth, the E7200 should overclock much better.

Fifth, I think the E7200 is a little less expensive.
First, the difference between 3 and 4 MB of L2 cache is relatively insignificant. Second, performance does not scale linearly with FSB frequency.

Neither will wipe out the speed advantage that the faster E7200 has.

Third, the E7200 is based on the 45 nm Wolfdale core which on a clock per clock basis is about 10% more efficient than the 65 nm Conroe core.

Fourth, the E7200 should overclock much better.

Fifth, I think the E7200 is a little less expensive.
 
Solution
Status
Not open for further replies.