Just a quick question about Core 2 Processors

NI_t3n_IChi_RYU

NI_t3n_IChi_RYU

New Member
Intel Core 2 DUO E6400 "LGA775 Alendalle" 2.13GHz (1066FSB)

182 pounds

OR

Intel Core 2 DUO E6600 "LGA775 Conroe" 2.40GHz (1066FSB)

250 pounds

Now i obviously know that the conroe is better but if i got the cheaper one wud i be downgrading myself alot??

Wud it be wise to spend the extra 70 quid and get the conroe or cud i do with just the E6400 on quite a tight budget

Wud u see a big difference in performance if the cpus were side-by-side

Thx
 
Cromewell said:
They are the same thing just more cache on the 6600.
Click to expand...
lol, no, not exactly... the 6600 has twice the Cache and one more multiplier which means (because of the extra multiplier) that it can clock to higher speeds then the 6400...
so yes, even if u are overclocking, the 6600 will perform better...
 
you wont be downgrading yourself for todays uses because they will both be blazingly fast especially overclocked. But in the future like always the 6600 will stay current longer.
 
lol, no, not exactly... the 6600 has twice the Cache and one more multiplier which means (because of the extra multiplier) that it can clock to higher speeds then the 6400...
so yes, even if u are overclocking, the 6600 will perform better...
Click to expand...
Having an extra multiplier doesn't mean a processor will OC higher, unless your limited by your FSB. There have been plenty of X2 4200+ that OC better than a 4800+ . It all depends on the grade of the individual chip.

There really isn't that big of a performance difference between the two. Just go with whatever fits your budget.
 
lol, no, not exactly... the 6600 has twice the Cache and one more multiplier which means (because of the extra multiplier) that it can clock to higher speeds then the 6400...
Click to expand...
The multiplier is not a core difference. The multiplier is semi-soft setting.
 
ah now those are the kind of answers im looking for. If i get a good pay this month E6600, if not E6400

Have to wait and see, thx ppl

:D :)
 
Encore4More said:
uf they are the same thing, just one has one more multiplier... then yes, it will OC higher...
Click to expand...

Generally speaking they will, but it usually wont mount to a 200Mhz higher OC. Take the PD 920 and 930 for example (2.8 and 3.0), several people OC'd them as high as they could go, and the 920 got to about 3.95Ghz, where as the 930 got slightly over 4Ghz. So generally speaking it will OC higher, however by overclocking standards, it's not going to make much of a difference.
 
Encore4More said:
uf they are the same thing, just one has one more multiplier... then yes, it will OC higher...
Click to expand...

Umm, no, not necessarily. Stock speed has no impact on OC performance. A slower chip (which is the same as a lower multiplier) can OC higher than a faster chip... even if you've got unlocked multi's, thats no guarentee that you will OC higher than a locked chip. I can say that there are plenty of 3000+s that overclock better than my crappy 3500+.

Multipliers are set after chip production. They speed bin them, then set the multiplier acordingly. Many times faster chips will get binned to lower models or vice versa. If that's the case, you'll get a slower chip that OCs higher than a faster chip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top