6400 sold - what now ?

musx64 · 29 Apr 2007 at 06:21

hi

I've sold my 6400, what cpu would you go for ?

6600, 6700 or AM2 X2 6000 ?

BillytheImpaler · 29 Apr 2007 at 06:25

Thought about going to a quad core? Xeon 3210s are cheap now.

musx64 · 29 Apr 2007 at 06:42

BillytheImpaler said:
Thought about going to a quad core? Xeon 3210s are cheap now.

Not really, not much point buying a quad core @ the moment, yes it would be good for video encoding because of the 8mb cache.

Im more inclined towards a 6700 or 6600 ! for those prices.

chaparral · 29 Apr 2007 at 08:29

musx64 said:
hi

I've sold my 6400, what cpu would you go for ?

6600, 6700 or AM2 X2 6000 ?

No point in getting a AM2 X2 6000 As you need to change your motherboard as well...

Why did you sell your C2D 6400 ??

Participant · 29 Apr 2007 at 09:06

Cob · 29 Apr 2007 at 11:06

E6600. The E6700 is a waste of money.

musx64 · 29 Apr 2007 at 20:39

chaparral said:
No point in getting a AM2 X2 6000 As you need to change your motherboard as well...

Why did you sell your C2D 6400 ??

got bored with some performance issues.

easyrider · 29 Apr 2007 at 20:40

musx64 said:
got bored with some performance issues.

What does that mean? :confused:

weringo · 29 Apr 2007 at 20:46

Selling an 6400 and replacing it with a 6600/6700 is a waste of time and money tbh. As others said, go quad core.

musx64 · 29 Apr 2007 at 20:51

easyrider said:
What does that mean?

I have to disagree with you easy.

Sometime back I asked you about performance differences in encoding a dvd w/ a 6400 and a 6600.

You replied that there was not much difference in encoding between the two, but there is a difference using the 4mg cache.

The 4MG cache is far more superior than the 2mb caches. In playing games and encoding, faster loading times.

Basically to say, I wasn't happy w/ the processor apart from it had a good stepping.

easyrider · 29 Apr 2007 at 20:56

musx64 said:
I have to disagree with you easy.

Sometime back I asked you about performance differences in encoding a dvd w/ a 6400 and a 6600.

You replied that there was not much difference in encoding between the two, but there is a difference using the 4mg cache.

The 4MG cache is far more superior than the 2mb caches. In playing games and encoding, faster loading times.

Basically to say, I wasn't happy w/ the processor apart from it had a good stepping.

How much of a difference did you notice?
Where did your comparison come from?

Have you actually used a 4mb C2D yourself?

easyrider · 29 Apr 2007 at 20:58

weringo said:
Selling an 6400 and replacing it with a 6600/6700 is a waste of time and money tbh. As others said, go quad core.

I would have to agree.

Getting rid of a 6400 that a nice cloker for extra 2mb cache is maddness IMO.

The difference just isn't big enough to warrant the change.

Quad core however is a different kettle of fish.

Ronaldo · 29 Apr 2007 at 21:03

go quad if u got the money or get a 6600 or even the new 64** with 4mb cache lol

hey easyrider waitinf for your reply on "4800+ Bottleneck 8800GTS? " lol

musx64 · 29 Apr 2007 at 21:14

easyrider said:
How much of a difference did you notice?
Where did your comparison come from?

Have you actually used a 4mb C2D yourself?

Easy you remind me of my old teacher

I mainly use tmpgenc express 4, ie. encoding a 3hr dvd - No not an english one. Using a 6600 took 3hrs, using a 6400 took 3 hrs 20mins.

Your last question sounds patronising, you are not the Only Chosen One with a series of conroes

Yes - I used to own a 6600 stepping: L628A345 - pukka chip

easyrider · 29 Apr 2007 at 21:17

musx64 said:
Easy you remind me of my old teacher

I mainly use tmpgenc express 4, ie. encoding a 3hr dvd - No not an english one. Using a 6600 took 3hrs, using a 6400 took 3 hrs 20mins.

Your last question sounds patronising, you are not the Only Chosen One with a series of conroes Yes - I used to own a 6600 stepping: L628A345

So if you already knew this then why did you sell the 6600 for a 6400.

In my testing the gap was not as big as that.

The only time there was a massive gap was with the quad.

If you encode then seriously look at getting a quad.

musx64 · 29 Apr 2007 at 21:20

easyrider said:
So if you already knew this then why did you sell the 6600 for a 6400.

Had some personal problems !

musx64 · 29 Apr 2007 at 21:27

easyrider said:
I would have to agree.

Getting rid of a 6400 that a nice cloker for extra 2mb cache is maddness IMO.

Not everyone wants to overclock to Kingdom Come, if wasn't so keen in encoding, I would have gone amd

steve258 · 30 Apr 2007 at 09:35

Just found a site that compares 2Mb & 4Mb at same clock speed:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/07/14/intel_core_2_duo_processors/5.html

6% - 9% performance increase overall, not much difference at all in games.

Dingleberry88 · 30 Apr 2007 at 11:10

musx64 said:
Using a 6600 took 3hrs, using a 6400 took 3 hrs 20mins.

It really worth the hassle of going through selling for less than you bought it for, then having to buy another, more expensive, CPU? Just for 20 minutes difference.

Just queue a few up overnight.

Edit: Slighty off topic, I did a 9-pass re-encode of a DVD yesterday. What used to take not far off a full day and night with my A643200 @ 2.4GHz, took just under 4 hours with my E6400 @ 3GHz. :eek:

musx64 · 30 Apr 2007 at 18:49

Dingleberry88 said:
It really worth the hassle of going through selling for less than you bought it for, then having to buy another, more expensive, CPU? Just for 20 minutes difference.

Just queue a few up overnight.

Edit: Slighty off topic, I did a 9-pass re-encode of a DVD yesterday. What used to take not far off a full day and night with my A643200 @ 2.4GHz, took just under 4 hours with my E6400 @ 3GHz.

Well I bought the 6400 for £100 new and sold it for £100.

Competitor rules

6400 sold - what now ?

Man of Honour