-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Will you be watching the FIFA World Cup Final?
Your Opinion. Building new PC.
- Thread starter Bcm
- Start date
QX6700RULZ
Expert Member
Difference as has been stated in a previous post, your E6300 needs 460*7 ie high stress on the board whilst for the same overclock the E4300 needs 358*9 so less strain on mobo, less volts therefore less heat and there is still plenty room to go higher.
The E6300 is only better at stock and only slightly so
Some people still need to learn to look at the whole picture and read before they spout their retoric
E4300 cheaper, easier to overclock and i see now available through Rectron
scotty777
...doesn't know
Difference as has been stated in a previous post, your E6300 needs 460*7 ie high stress on the board whilst for the same overclock the E4300 needs 358*9 so less strain on mobo, less volts therefore less heat and there is still plenty room to go higher.
The E6300 is only better at stock and only slightly so
Some people still need to learn to look at the whole picture and read before they spout their retoric
E4300 cheaper, easier to overclock and i see now available through Rectron
oh my thank you QX6700RULZ, the e4300 has a lower fsb but a higher multiplier, coz if you want to shoot down the e4300 then lets give it a gun, so if i put a tiny overclock... say a 266mhz from 200mhz, thats boostest it to 2.4ghz @ 1064mhz fsb, with just so happens to be the same as the e6600! now thats means 100% of the mobo can overclock to that speed. now i heard the same guy say where i got 2.1ghz for the e6300 and 2.7ghz for the e4300, how i hear you ask, well most cheap mobo only go up to 300mhz, so add up the numbers e6300= 300x7 which = 2.1ghz
the e4300= 300 x9 which = 2.7ghz
these are real word overclocks, and no matter what the e4300 is the easier, more stable, less demanding and the better overclocking cpu, you only need ddr 2 667mhz ram to overclock over 3ghz, as for the e6300 you ganna need ddr2 800mhz ram to get it to 3ghz.
oh you who was it that keeps calling the e4300 a e4200, coz the e4200 was discontinued, the only other player in the e4xxx bracket and thes the e4400.
QX6700RULZ
Expert Member
Lol
killadoob
Honorary Master
let me ask you this
is an overclock e6300 @ 3.22ghz faster than a stock e6600?
is an overclock e6300 @ 3.22ghz faster than a stock e6600?
QX6700RULZ
Expert Member
Much faster, an E6300 running at same as an E6600 running at stock (ie 2.4)will be roughly 3 to 5% slower due to the halved cache but only in cache intensive apps otherwise they will be identical.
An E6300 running at 3 gig is faster than a X6800, so clock for clock all core 2's are equal but for cache in Allandales (2meg against 4meg)
scotty777
...doesn't know
killadoob, the fact that the e4300 can reach 3.2ghz and not even use all the ddr 2 800mhz power like the e6300 is amazing, in theory the e4300 can hit 3.6ghz and then only you will use 100% of the ddr2 800
Slow your roll. I'm ORB Front Page for 3DM05, I think just might know a little bit about overclocking... Where are your results? <_<
As for the E4300 it's pie in the sky. I know the lower fsb helps, but come now you make the E4300 seem to be the overclockers wet dream, it isn't. At 3.4GHz in some texts its coming in slower than the X6800 at stock. Granted that's a 4MB chip I'd still go with the E6300 or E6400 for that matter. Have you ever thought that maybe the user who is building this new PC doesn't want to overclock? Overclocking voids his warranty for a performance boost he might not even notice. For R200 I'm going with the E6300
nGAGEd55
Expert Member
but wouldn't the E6300 or E6400 also get similar results at 3.4GHz because of their reduced cache?
In that case i'd agree, unless he's on a really tight budget, but if overclocking isn't your thing, rather go for the E6300.Have you ever thought that maybe the user who is building this new PC doesn't want to overclock? Overclocking voids his warranty for a performance boost he might not even notice. For R200 I'm going with the E6300
Last edited:
QX6700RULZ
Expert Member
Slow your roll. I'm ORB Front Page for 3DM05, I think just might know a little bit about overclocking... Where are your results? <_<
As for the E4300 it's pie in the sky. I know the lower fsb helps, but come now you make the E4300 seem to be the overclockers wet dream, it isn't. At 3.4GHz in some texts its coming in slower than the X6800 at stock. Granted that's a 4MB chip I'd still go with the E6300 or E6400 for that matter. Have you ever thought that maybe the user who is building this new PC doesn't want to overclock? Overclocking voids his warranty for a performance boost he might not even notice. For R200 I'm going with the E6300
Kindly direct me to those texts as every review of the chip mentioning an E4300 and an X6800 has the E4300 winning (obviously E4300 overclocked and extreme at stock)
http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2903 X6800 wins in games due to cache, in non cache dependant apps the E4300 kills the X6800
Would post more links but this dammed HSDPA 3g is pathetically slow especially with overseas sites, shall edit later when things speed up
Thats the review right there.
I did say in "some" and where the E4300 at 3.4GHz isn't winning, that's some is it not? I know by and large a 3.4GHz 4300 will be faster than an X6800. I did also mention that the X6800 is a 4meg chip did I not? So you're not really disagreeing with what I'm saying. I'm well aware of the overclocked results.
As someone else above said, if overclocking isn't your thing, rather go for E6300. Don't assume everybody has an even remote interest in overclocking because you would be sadly mistaken.
I did say in "some" and where the E4300 at 3.4GHz isn't winning, that's some is it not? I know by and large a 3.4GHz 4300 will be faster than an X6800. I did also mention that the X6800 is a 4meg chip did I not? So you're not really disagreeing with what I'm saying. I'm well aware of the overclocked results.
As someone else above said, if overclocking isn't your thing, rather go for E6300. Don't assume everybody has an even remote interest in overclocking because you would be sadly mistaken.
QX6700RULZ
Expert Member
Thats the review right there.
I did say in "some" and where the E4300 at 3.4GHz isn't winning, that's some is it not? I know by and large a 3.4GHz 4300 will be faster than an X6800. I did also mention that the X6800 is a 4meg chip did I not? So you're not really disagreeing with what I'm saying. I'm well aware of the overclocked results.
As someone else above said, if overclocking isn't your thing, rather go for E6300. Don't assume everybody has an even remote interest in overclocking because you would be sadly mistaken.
lol have another which makes it an even more one sided story
As you say it is up to the owner what he/she wishes do do with their purchase and yes no overclocking then E6300 is prob the better buy until March when the E4300 drops 40 or so dollars.
Me i just love overclocking (wish heat was not such an issue with QX) so all in all any c2d is a great buy. All the c2d's are the same architecture (spelling) so clock for clock only real difference is cache and ram overclocking related to FSB
scotty777
...doesn't know
lol, the funny thing is if a e6300 was runing @ 3.4ghz it would kill the e4300 @3.4ghz, this is due to the fact that the e6300 will be running at a much higher fsb then the (1942mhz)and the e4300 will run at 1511mhz...
scotty777
...doesn't know
ha ha ha, sorry, just get the best you can afford