allendale vs conroe
- Thread starter newguy5
- Start date
liquidshadow
New Member
Supposedly the 2mb ones overclock higher, maybe not in max speed, but the amount they overclock.
newguy5
New Member
where does the cache make a difference in performance? i mean, why is 4mb better than 2mb, besides the obvious reasoning that 4mb is more?
Geoff
VIP Member
They may seem like they overclock higher because they have lower stock clocks as well. The only 2MB versions are the E6300 and E6400, as well as the newer E4xxx series. And they dont overclock higher then say, the E6600 or E6700, but when you compare it to the stock speeds, there is more of a gain on the lower-end models.
But again, its not because of the cache.
liquidshadow
New Member
[-0MEGA-];587384 said:
That was what I was saying and I didn't say it was because of the cache. By saying the "2mb cache ones" I was implying the e4300, e6300, e6400.
ETSA
New Member
NeedComputerFast
New Member
i heard the e6300, e6400 actually have 4 in cache, however 2 are disabled, whereas the E4*** models, being allensdale only actually have 2 built in. I've heard the E4300 can be extremely overclocked up to the level where it is faster that the X6800, HERE, and its only going to cost in the low $100's
newguy5
New Member
so does anyone make any sort of verdict as to which of c2d processors are actually the best bargain for the money out there?
Geoff
VIP Member
I bet everyone would agree with me that the Core 2 Duo's are the best processors around for the price.
newguy5
New Member
When you use the term "Allendale", which processors are you referring to? The E6300 and E6400 are both Conroe's.
you're right, i don't know what i was thinking. what i meant was the 2mb version vs the 4mb version.
Geoff
VIP Member
Sorry, read your question wrong.
If you dont plan to overclock, I would say the E6300 would be the best because of the faster bus. But if you do plan to overclock, the E4300 may yield a bit higher potential.
newguy5
New Member
[-0MEGA-];588632 said:
the benchmarks i've seen of the e4300 have shown that the e4300 and e6300 perform almost identically, even considering the difference in the fsb. the e6320 may outperform the e4300 more substantially once you factor in the 2mb l2 cache difference though.
i probably will OC, but within some stipulations. i still think someone needs to OC the e4300 and determine a relatively stable point. i am not going to be the extreme OC'er, but would like to OC to a state where i can leave my computer on all the time and feel pretty confident my processor will last me, in that OC'd state, for a solid 3-4 years. if i can't do that, i may as well go for the e6600 and not OC it until it becomes severely outdated (since i know it OCs so well).
liquidshadow
New Member
Both the e4300 and the e6300 ahve 2mb L2 cache...The e4300 would be easier to overclock in my opinion, because of the higher multiplier.
newguy5
New Member
The e4300 would be easier to overclock in my opinion, because of the higher multiplier.
i was referencing the e6320, not the e6300. there sure is a lot of misreading of my posts going on around here!
bldgengineer
New Member
If you aren't that confident in your overclocking capability, why not buy a processor that already performs where you want it to for just a little extra?
If you buy a 4300 and overclock it and it somehow gets fried or you fry something else, you're going to end up spending more money and downtime then you would if you had just spent the extra hundred or so in the first place.
From what I'm reading here, it looks as though you're not confident enough to risk it but yet you don't have the money to buy the performance that you want. Then save up a little extra or wait until early-mid may to buy what you want(better yet, save up while waiting until May
).
If you buy a 4300 and overclock it and it somehow gets fried or you fry something else, you're going to end up spending more money and downtime then you would if you had just spent the extra hundred or so in the first place.
From what I'm reading here, it looks as though you're not confident enough to risk it but yet you don't have the money to buy the performance that you want. Then save up a little extra or wait until early-mid may to buy what you want(better yet, save up while waiting until May
).
newguy5
New Member
If you aren't that confident in your overclocking capability, why not buy a processor that already performs where you want it to for just a little extra?
If you buy a 4300 and overclock it and it somehow gets fried or you fry something else, you're going to end up spending more money and downtime then you would if you had just spent the extra hundred or so in the first place.
From what I'm reading here, it looks as though you're not confident enough to risk it but yet you don't have the money to buy the performance that you want. Then save up a little extra or wait until early-mid may to buy what you want(better yet, save up while waiting until May
never OC'd, but i know quite a bit about it. i feel comfortable with the subject and know what parts to buy in order to get good results. but longevity is something that no one can really address since the c2d hasn't been out a while.
i can certainly afford a better rig. the $100 difference (once prices drop) in the e4300 and e6600 is nothing to me, but i'm one of those guys that is all about getting the most for your money. on top of that, i am not a huge computer guy. really my computer for me is fine. i only want to upgrade because the new games look a lot of fun, although i've played many games in the past but never really been an addict.
i think i've read so much about the new components of computers that i feel i must upgrade now, although i know i don't need to.
now you may understand why i'm all about spending the least for the best system