E6320 vs. E6300

S

stevepella

New Member
My understanding is that the only difference between these two processors in that the E6320 has a 4MB cache, while the E6300 only has 2MB. Please correct me if there are any other material differences that I should be aware of.

I'm currently in the market for a new PC and have narrowed my search down between two models. Both are the same except that one has the E6300 processor and 1GB of RAM, while the other has the E6320 processor and 2GB of RAM. The former is about CDN$829 while the latter is $999.

Given that I could add a GB of RAM to the cheaper unit for about CDN$100, I'm wondering if the performance boost associated with the increased cache on the E6320 is worth spending more. I intend to use the PC for music, games, photo editing, etc.

Your input would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Steve
 
You are correct, the only difference is the cache.

Performance wise it doesnt make much difference. There was only a slight difference with a similarly clocked C2D with both 2MB and 4MB of L2 cache.

And since you said you could get another 1GB of RAM for $100CDN, your basically asking if its worth spending $70 to get the extra cache. IMO I would say no, it's not worth it.
 
The 6320 is gonna be the same price as the 6300, no? Wait until I get home later and I will draft that processor sheet out.
 
INTELCRAZY said:
The 6320 is gonna be the same price as the 6300, no? Wait until I get home later and I will draft that processor sheet out.
Click to expand...
Yes and no, I think. Although I believe the individual retail price on these processors is expected to be vastly similar, if not the same, the pricing of PC's utilizing them won't necessarily be. I'm thinking that it will be easier to get a discount on the older of the two PC's despite the similarity in manufacturer processor cost.

That said, I'll hold off until I hear back from you. Thanks in advance for your help.

- Steve
 
INTELCRAZY said:
The 6320 is gonna be the same price as the 6300, no? Wait until I get home later and I will draft that processor sheet out.
Click to expand...
Relating to what steve said, the prices of the E6300 and E6320 arent much, but PC's that use those processors dont reflect the negligible price differences.
 
stevepella said:
the pricing of PC's utilizing them won't necessarily be. I'm thinking that it will be easier to get a discount on the older of the two PC's despite the similarity in manufacturer processor cost.
Click to expand...


Who would buy a manufactured PC? Anyone with a good "money-saving" ability would build their PC. I think buying a PC is the biggest rip-off, ever. When buying, you don't always get genuine components. They take a system and slap a big DELL logo on it.
 
[-0MEGA-];629973 said:
You are correct, the only difference is the cache.

Performance wise it doesnt make much difference. There was only a slight difference with a similarly clocked C2D with both 2MB and 4MB of L2 cache.

And since you said you could get another 1GB of RAM for $100CDN, your basically asking if its worth spending $70 to get the extra cache. IMO I would say no, it's not worth it.
Click to expand...

so comparing the e6400 to the e6600 has double the cache and only 300mhz higher. Performance wise much difference?
 
INTELCRAZY said:
Who would buy a manufactured PC? Anyone with a good "money-saving" ability would build their PC. I think buying a PC is the biggest rip-off, ever. When buying, you don't always get genuine components. They take a system and slap a big DELL logo on it.
Click to expand...
Because some people dont have the time or knowledge to build their own computer.
 
[-0MEGA-];630451 said:
Because some people dont have the time or knowledge to build their own computer.
Click to expand...

and also your the owner of some big company buying comps for all of the 12 floors. Your really gonna build all 300 pcs?
 
Don't the new 6320 and 6420 Procs have an increase in FSB as well, to equal that of all the other C2D lineup?


*edit*
Yeah, they are.

# Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 (LGA775, 2.4GHz, 1067MHz FSB, 4MB L2, Conroe);
# Intel Core 2 Duo E6420 (LGA775, 2.13GHz, 1067MHz FSB, 4MB L2, Conroe);
# Intel Core 2 Duo E6320 (LGA775, 1.86GHz, 1067MHz FSB, 4MB L2, Conroe);

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/print/dualcore-roundup.html

That however, makes a little more difference than the +2mb cache :]
 
Last edited:
Hass said:
Don't the new 6320 and 6420 Procs have an increase in FSB as well, to equal that of all the other C2D lineup?


*edit*
Yeah, they are.

# Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 (LGA775, 2.4GHz, 1067MHz FSB, 4MB L2, Conroe);
# Intel Core 2 Duo E6420 (LGA775, 2.13GHz, 1067MHz FSB, 4MB L2, Conroe);
# Intel Core 2 Duo E6320 (LGA775, 1.86GHz, 1067MHz FSB, 4MB L2, Conroe);

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/print/dualcore-roundup.html

That however, makes a little more difference than the +2mb cache :]
Click to expand...


nope same FSB only differance is the cache... i dont think its worth it for the extra money...
 
Was probably rounded from 1066.6666

But I thought the 6300 has 800FSB? :/
Bleh, guess I was mistaken :[
 
darksideleader said:
lmao mabye i should higher you (when i get my big company :P)

and aren't new models 45nm? if they are less power comsumption and slightly better ocing.
Click to expand...
They dont have any 45nm processors on the market yet, but Intels new "true" quad-cores will be 45nm, and are expected to be released in Q3 this year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top