Intel E4300 vs. E4400 vs. E6320 vs. E6420 vs. E6600 vs. E6700

[remember]

The title pretty much sums up my question.

The link below shows some of the specs and prices of all the cpu's in the subject title.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...2E16819115015,N82E16819115014,N82E16819115003

I have substituted the E6300 and E6400 for the E6320 and E6420, because. .
1) they are actually cheaper, and. .
2) from what I have read, they have 4MB's of L2 cache instead of only 2MB's, and whatever other perfomance differences I have no idea, and thus brings me to my actual question.

What is the "oc" speed/performance and the Non-"oc" speed/performance difference between all these cpu's?


(It should be known that I do not do any gaming. I will be using a Blu-ray burner in this new system build for both playing Blu-ray ROM movies and recording TV programs directly from my satellite TV system on to my hardrive or burner. I also do a lot of web surf multi-tasking comparing info/prices from 1 site to many others.)

From some of what I have read, some sites say "the improvement from Ocing, is not worth much of a noticeable difference"

However I dont understand how some sites can say that, when the following website. . .
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=433&model2=431&chart=189
. . . shows that there is at least a 10-20% speed difference between the E6400 and the E6700. (I assume that "ocing" a cpu with all the same specs as another but of difference "stock" Ghz speeds, just makes the lower "stock" cpu speed as fast as another higher "stock" cpu speed after the cpu has been oc'd?) Please correct me if any of this is wrong.

I should say that I dont think its worth the extra money ($200w/tax for the E6420 vs. $347w/tax for the E6700 from Newegg)for only 10-20% difference in time speed performance, (at least as far as the cpu chart comparison at the tomshardware website shows.)

Now because the tomshardware website does not list and show the performance of the E6320 nor the E4300 or the E4400, I dont know what the speed performance of these 3 here mentioned cpu's are like, compared to the E6420 and above.

Can anyone give me any ideas about how much slower the E6320 and even the E4300 and E4400 cpu's are compared to the more expensive E6420?

I know there is only a little more than $20 difference between the E6420 and the E6320, but because I am "considering" trying to oc my cpu(someday) I would rather try to do it with a less expensive cpu, because I have never oc'd before, and I would kill myself if I accidentally kill the cpu. Plus, again, I dont know what the speed/performance difference is between the E6420 and the E6320, let alone the E4300 or E4400 or what the after "oc" resulting difference between them all would be either. Please let me know.

Can anyone give me some advice on what the speed/performance difference between the above cpu's are like? and perhaps what I would and would not be able to do with some of the cpu's vs. the other cpu's? and ultimately, so I can just make up my mind and finally decide which cpu to get? Long, tall order here. Any good help and advice is very much needed and very much looked forward to. (If someone can explain whether its the FSB, or Ghz speed or whatever aspect that makes the cpu fast or slow, I think that would also help a lot too)

 

[Geoff]

Thats a huge post, lol.

I would go with either the E6320 or E6420. The E6700 is overpriced for what you get.

The disadvantages of the E4300/E4400 are the lower FSB and lower cache, so I wouldnt recommend anything lower then the E6320.

 

[eric92park]

yea... low cache reduces system performance
and are you practicing Overclocking or Trying to overclock, I practiced overclocking with Pentium 4 processors, it was like 20 dollar each(1.2GHz i think)

 

[remember]

To Omega:

Yeah it was a huge post, . . I had to take a few naps to write it.

So you pretty much recommended me the cpu's I am planning to get; They're not too high and not too low, just in the middle.

As far as the lower FSB of the E4300/4400, I have no idea how much slower they are. The price is about $122w/tax for the E4300, and the E6420 is about $200w/tax; about 60% more in cost, but is it 60% faster?
(That's why I dont think the E6700 is worth the extra 20% speed performance for an extra $110 or 50% higher cost compared to the E6600)

But again, I dont really understand the overclocking thing. I have read that certain cpu's have "unlocked" multipliers? or something, which means that you can "oc" more than others. But which exact cpu's and to what extent, I have no idea. Can you expand on that?

(The main reason why I am being so difficult to decide, is because I get butterflies when I think about trying to overclock one of these and result in killing it.) Again, I have never Oc'd any cpu, so obviously I would rather do it with a cheaper cpu.

Which brings me to

eric92park:

I have a Pentium 4, 2.8Ghz cpu right now inside a Dell system, but someone a long time ago, told me that Dell systems can Not be overclocked. I dont know if that is still true or if there is someway to get around that? But yes I would definitely rather practice "Ocing" on my P4 cpu, than (*&!@^#_) messing up with a new E6420($200), or even a E4300($122). Let me know if its possible to "oc" with my Dell system and also what would be the speed/performance difference between all the other cpu's in question before and after "ocing"?

As far as the cache that both you and Omega are talking about. . .just to make sure, are you talking about the 2 and 4MB L2 cache?

I dont want to be a trouble maker, but again I read somewhere that the performance/speed difference between the 2 and 4MB L2 cache is hardly noticeable. Maybe that was only in reference to certain types of applications?

I have one last question. . . If I decide to get the E6420, which I probably will, or maybe even the E6320, how fast will they be able to be Oc'd to? The E6320 is a "stock" 1.86Ghz, but if I overclock it properly, will it be as fast as a E6600?(it has a stock 2.4Ghz) What about the E6420, and even the E4300 and E4400? What cpu will they be as fast as, if assuming, I am able to "oc" safely?

 

[ETSA]

I just bought an e4300 for my wife's new computer and plan to OC, I am confident I will reach a speed and performance that will surpass all the processors you listed, at stock settings. This was a decision based upon budget though. The FSB can be easily manipulated to reach higher than that of the conroe core. That was my main selling point. I will be happy with the performance and more importantly, the wife will be.

 

[Geoff]

The E4300 is a great processor to overclock, but if your leaving it stock, I think it's worth the extra money to have twice the cache, and a higher FSB.

Because from the way you're thinking, why not just get a Pentium 4 for $30?

 

[`PaWz]

I would just get the E4300 and Overclock it to 3GHz. 3.4 is possible with stock cooling if you have a good Mobo.

 

[ETSA]

a P4 and a C2D are very different, you couldn't come close to the performance of a C2D by OCing a P4..

 

[remember]

To ETSA:

???? You say with the E4300 "I am confident I will reach a speed and performance that will surpass all the processors you listed, at stock settings." ???

If its possible to oc the E4300,(with only 1.83Ghz stock speed and 800Mhz FSB) to faster than the "stock" 2.67Ghz of the E6700(with 1066 Mhz FSB) then, I now have to seriously consider getting the E4300. If its possible to make the E4300 as fast or even faster than the E6700, then I cant understand why I would spend more than the $122 or so that the E4300 costs. So how is it possible for the E4300 to be faster, (with only 2MB's L2 cache and a FSB of only 800Mhz) vs. 1066Mhz and 4MB's of L2cache for the E6*** series?

How is what you say possible? What are the rules of "Ocing"?

To Omega:
What are you talking about? I already have a P4 cpu, but it's in a Dell system. Can I "oc" it? Again, I would rather practice my first "oc" attempt with an older and cheaper P4 cpu, than the more expensive newer cpu's, but is it possible to do this with my Dell system?

Also, you say. ."The E4300 is a great processor to overclock", but what about the E6320 or the E6420? Are they not ok for overclocking?

ETSA said that the E4300 can be "oc'd" to faster than the stock E6700, . . .so does that mean that the E6320/E6420 could be "oc'd" even faster?

To Pawz:

That's going to be my next question. . . about which Mobo to get?

Do you think, as you say, that the E4300, if "oc'd" to 3.0Ghz or even 3.4Ghz {with whichever is a good Mobo},(I have no idea), that it would be faster than the E6320 or E6420 at stock?(which have FSB's of 1066Mhz)

Also, would the E4300 be fast enough to run a Blu-ray burner? if I chicken out and decide not to "oc"?

I'm gonna make a decision today, at least for the cpu- the Mobo is gonna be hard to figure out.

 

[remember]

I'm not comparing "Ocing" the P4 vs. the C2D

To ETSA:

I have rough idea that the P4, 2.8Ghz(stock) is about 4 times slower than the E6700, from the cpu chart comparison at tomshardware website. . . but

I wasn't trying to compare the two. I was asking if it's possible for me to "practice" "ocing" my P4 cpu,(that's part of a Dell system), because I have never "oc'd" before and obviously I would rather begin my "oc" testing with an old P4, than a new C2D, just in case I mess it up?

 

[ETSA]

There are many posts around this forum on OCing c2d's. They are relatively easy and for most people the first cpu they have OCed, partially due to its ease.

 

[hermeslyre]

To answer one of your several questions yes, it would be smart to practice Overclocking on your P4 if only to gain some experience with overclocking.

Also every Core2duo is based on the same/similar core architecture. If you were to overclock an e4300 to e6600 speeds it would garner similar performance, correct, It also means that even the lowly e4300 can overclock as high as an e6700.. If there wasn't other variables. Overclocking relies on other hardware such as RAM, and your Motherboard. To further complicate things the e4300 has a low multiplier which while it may of no consequence if your hardware (RAM) is up to snuff, It will make overclocking hell if you have lower speed ram.

You mentioned the Exx20 series with the extra 2mb of L2 cache.. And you are correct in that it doesn't actually make a large difference to performance.

Finaly If you are having trouble choosing a motherboard may i suggest the Gigabyte DS3, or the EVGA 680i?

Did i miss something?? (seriously, i don't think i read through the entire thread)

 

[xxxalpinexxx80]

i would get the quad core for 300 in july 25 since there good processors for doing that stuff, but i would get the e6600 the price went down by 100 dollars 2.4 it will last longer if u dont oc with stock cooler and its powerful enough to run basicly anything i can think of.

i would have in my mind that the quad core q6600(kentsfield) and e6850(3.0ghz conroe) are gonna be in the 300 area, id wait and get that for the extra money cuase then ull have a processor that can keep up longer and quad core are great for video editing idn if ur gonna do it or not but its up to u otherwize i would get the e6600

 

[eric92park]

How long are Quad Designed to last anyways?

 

[eric92park]

To Omega:

Yeah it was a huge post, . . I had to take a few naps to write it.

So you pretty much recommended me the cpu's I am planning to get; They're not too high and not too low, just in the middle.

As far as the lower FSB of the E4300/4400, I have no idea how much slower they are. The price is about $122w/tax for the E4300, and the E6420 is about $200w/tax; about 60% more in cost, but is it 60% faster?
(That's why I dont think the E6700 is worth the extra 20% speed performance for an extra $110 or 50% higher cost compared to the E6600)

But again, I dont really understand the overclocking thing. I have read that certain cpu's have "unlocked" multipliers? or something, which means that you can "oc" more than others. But which exact cpu's and to what extent, I have no idea. Can you expand on that?

(The main reason why I am being so difficult to decide, is because I get butterflies when I think about trying to overclock one of these and result in killing it.) Again, I have never Oc'd any cpu, so obviously I would rather do it with a cheaper cpu.

Which brings me to

eric92park:

I have a Pentium 4, 2.8Ghz cpu right now inside a Dell system, but someone a long time ago, told me that Dell systems can Not be overclocked. I dont know if that is still true or if there is someway to get around that? But yes I would definitely rather practice "Ocing" on my P4 cpu, than (*&!@^#_) messing up with a new E6420($200), or even a E4300($122). Let me know if its possible to "oc" with my Dell system and also what would be the speed/performance difference between all the other cpu's in question before and after "ocing"?

As far as the cache that both you and Omega are talking about. . .just to make sure, are you talking about the 2 and 4MB L2 cache?

I dont want to be a trouble maker, but again I read somewhere that the performance/speed difference between the 2 and 4MB L2 cache is hardly noticeable. Maybe that was only in reference to certain types of applications?

I have one last question. . . If I decide to get the E6420, which I probably will, or maybe even the E6320, how fast will they be able to be Oc'd to? The E6320 is a "stock" 1.86Ghz, but if I overclock it properly, will it be as fast as a E6600?(it has a stock 2.4Ghz) What about the E6420, and even the E4300 and E4400? What cpu will they be as fast as, if assuming, I am able to "oc" safely?

Yes, but its possible that some motherboards manufactured by dell might not be able to do overclocking because of their BIOS... I believe old models of dell's MOBO they used are not capable because they dont have Volt adjustment menu... I used...D850GB Intel(Discountinused project MOBO) with cracked BIOS(I made it able to control Voltage) to practice OCing.. But I dont recommend OCing now because Life time reduces atleast 3/4... Oh Well.

Also, OCing capability depends on How well your CPU cooler and Motherobard can handle, if you have the right cooler and right Motherboard, you can OC to higher GHz than ocing with crappy cooler and motherboard...
I Hope I helped a bit
EDIT: I think I burned like three Pentium4 CPU out of 12... It was first time you know

 

[hermeslyre]

I think that Dell and other proprietary companies still disallow overclocking on some of their non gaming models via a bios lock. I really dislike dell.

Oh and overclocking doesn't reduce lifespan by 3/4.. It can if voltage is seriously messed around with but generally a safe overclock will reduce lifespan 1/10 or 1/8. By that time your comp will be ancient.

 

[remember]

Ok, I know I said I was going to make up my mind and finally decide which cpu to get already a few days ago. But today is definitely the day when I am going to decide.

To hereslyre:
You say "It also means that even the lowly e4300 can overclock as high as an e6700.. If there wasn't other variables." By other variables, I assume you mean the 800Mhz RAM as opposed to 533 or lower. Please correct me if I'm wrong. If that and a compatable Mobo are all that is necessary for
"ocing", then please let me know if I am missing anything.

My problem is that, I just bought a Blu-ray burner and I have to build a new computer capable of using it within the next few weeks, hence I have to at least buy the cpu today. Because this is my first computer build, you should understand I am very nervous, to say the least.

The price of the E4300 is only $115 vs $224 for the E6600 and as long as it(E4300) is sufficient for my Blu-ray burner and there is nothing that could justify the price difference, I will opt for the E4300.

Is the E6600 twice as fast/good as the E4300? Again, this is all very confusing for me, especially, when people say that The E4300 can be "oc'd" to faster than the E6700, but I will only get the E4300 if it is sufficient to run the Blu-ray burner. For the last time, can you offer me the last advice, I promise to ask on this subject?

To xxxalpinexxx:
Since, I have to build this within the next few weeks, I cant wait for July. I will probably build another system in July with the new Quad core cpu releases, but for now, I have to build a system that can verify my Blu-ray burner is working, but at the same time, I'm still going to be using this system for everything else, and just don't want to regret buying the E4300, and then say, I should have just bought the E6600. . .Is it really worth twice the price of the E4300?

Also you say. . ."the e6600 the price went down by 100 dollars 2.4 it will last longer if u dont oc with stock cooler"

How long will the E4300 last if I do "oc"?

The fact that I am still slightly considering "ocing" is the main reason why I cant make up my mind, but also because it is half the price and for the $224 price of an E6600, I think it will be more cost beneficial to get a $300 quad core in July. But for today, I have to start building my new system. Again, I have never built a computer before, let alone, "oc'd" one. But the E4300 must be sufficent to at least run my Blu-ray burner. Do you know? if so, is the speed/performance of the E6600 worth twice the price?

To eric92park:
Well, I guess I'll have to hold off trying to "oc" my Dell system and if you burned 3 out of 12 cpu's, that's just another reason why I cant decide which cpu to get.

Please help me one last time on this. Intel E4300 or Intel E6600? Remember, it has to be good enough for my new Blu-ray burner, and is the speed/performance of the E6600 worth twice the price of the E4300?

 

[hermeslyre]

I would opt for the e4300. It is more than capable of keeping up with a blue-ray player.

The overclock you would apply to an e4300 to bring it up to e6600 speeds would be minimal.. It's when you attempt to reach 3.0-3.5 and beyond that the e4300 may be alittle less than optimum. It is of course possible however.

 

[remember]

Thank you.

Ok, That's great. I am going to buy it right now. (For some reason, I've been seeing it sell for less on amazon, than ebay)

I didn't really understand the second part of your advice. .?? "The overclock you would apply to an e4300 to bring it up to e6600 speeds would be minimal.??? It's when you attempt to reach 3.0-3.5 and beyond that the e4300 may be alittle less than optimum." ???

 

[kof2000]

by the time your cpu dies from oc you'll probably be using a brand new build already.