amd 3200+ vs intel e6300

hardc0re_tid · 26 Oct 2006 at 12:17

just wondering how much quicker my new e6300 will be than my current 3200 barton.

i know the e6300 has 2 cores at 1.86 and only 1 is used the majority of the time for 1 app. but my 3200 (single core obviously) runs 2.2, just cant get my head around it tbh.

no comments like fiesta to ferrari please

VeNT · 26 Oct 2006 at 12:26

hardc0re_tid said:
just wondering how much quicker my new e6300 will be than my current 3200 barton.

i know the e6300 has 2 cores at 1.86 and only 1 is used the majority of the time for 1 app. but my 3200 (single core obviously) runs 2.2, just cant get my head around it tbh.

no comments like fiesta to ferrari please

I went from 3200 to E6300, then from stock E6300 to 3.22GHz,
it is SO much faster, much better at everything and runs two FAH cores AT THE SAME TIME!

semi-pro waster · 26 Oct 2006 at 12:34

Pure Ghz is a pretty poor way of measuring a CPUs speed and has been for quite a while(you know this from the fact you have a chip that is/was nominally equivalent to a CPU running at 3.2ghz from the same era). However due to increases in the efficiency of design a current CPU can have a lower clock speed but perform much faster. For comparison if it helps a 6300 is about equivalent to an X2 4600, you also have to take into account that you could move from 32bit Windows to 64bit if you chose.

I'm not sure of the exact speed differences between an XP 3200 and a 6300 but suffice to say it will be huge.

hardc0re_tid · 26 Oct 2006 at 12:42

VeNT said:
I went from 3200 to E6300, then from stock E6300 to 3.22GHz,
it is SO much faster, much better at everything and runs two FAH cores AT THE SAME TIME!

what board and ram are you using? i have the Asus P5B Deluxe and an e6300, RAM im going to purchase today or tomorrow, 2gb GeIL 6400 cas4 ULL