Conroe <3Ghz vs. P4 Dual Core 940/950 >=3.2Ghz

[Tigjaw]

Ok, I've been on here recently looking to build my own computer but this isn't really about that.

I found the Intel Pentium 4 940 Dual Core "LGA775 Presler" 3.2GHz (800FSB) - Retail (CP-113-IN) and decided that was the processor for me, a fine upgrade over my Prescott. After being told that Conroe isn't necessarily better than it's none-conroe counterpart of a higher clockspeed I was confused to say the least to find every single person recommending the
Intel Core 2 DUO E6300 "LGA775 Conroe" 1.86GHz (1066FSB) - Retail (CP-126-IN)
or Intel Core 2 DUO E6400 "LGA775 Conroe" 2.13GHz (1066FSB) - Retail (CP-127-IN) ahead of any other processors.

Now, what has me confused is that on paper the none-conroe Intel P4 DC 940 actually looks better than those two conroe processors but everybody seems to hype the Core2s up so much I feel like I'm back to square one in choosing the best processor in terms for bang for buck.

So my question is, despite the significantly lower clockspeeds what makes the conroe a better choice over the handsomely specced Intel P4 940? Is it simply the overclocking potential?
I'm not very up to date with all the technical information about hardware (I'm a software guy) but I'd appreciate your views, stats and whatever else you want to throw in here.

Hopefully it will also provide answers for anybody else in a similar predicament as me.

Thanks,

Josh

[Discuss]

 

[Tigjaw]

Thanks Assassin, after reading that article I feel a bit more informed whilst still confused as to what exactly makes the core2 so good, I can't really follow all the technical lingo but what I understood from all the charts was that the 2.13Ghz Conroe is significantly more powerful than the Pentium Dual Core 940 3.2Ghz I was going to buy, would you say that is accurate?

 

[Tigjaw]

Thanks again Assassin; so it's actually the physical difference that makes the Core2 better (theoretically).

I'll keep an eye on those sites, especially tomshardware.com as it seems to be quite trusted around here. I'll be glad when I've got this all sorted so I can set this beauty up Whether I get the Conroe 2.13Ghz or the 940 P4 Dual Core 3.2Ghz can wait because the motherboard I've chosen is compatible with both, but I'll no doubt be forced by my neurotic nature to check a few hundred more times

 

[Tigjaw]

From the benchmarks I've seen so far, even the 1.83 is faster than the P4's @3.6Ghz, and in games +quite a few other tests it even beats the 3.73 extreme edition.

That same low end 1.83Ghz processor seems to come in close to the performance of an AMD X2 4400, sometimes its faster than the X2 4800, other times slower than the X2 4200. But considering its the bargain basement Core 2 Duo, thats pretty impressive.

Probably the 'best' chip will be the E6600, as the extra cache gives a good performance boost.

Are all those processors you listed that the 1.83 outperformed dual cores? The processor I chose was the Intel P4 Dual Core 940 3.2Ghz, so should the 2.13Ghz outperform even that processor on all counts by a significant boost? Also, would it be worth the extra ~£80 to get the E6600 over the 2.13Ghz?

 

[Tigjaw]

Intel DP965LT 965 (Socket 775) PCI-Express DDR2 Motherboard (MB-011-IN) £88

that's the motherboard I chose, that supports conroe doesn't it?

 

[Tigjaw]

Sorry I know the Motherboard does say it supports it but I'm pretty insecure about my choices when it comes to spending so much money! You should have seen me when I bought my telescope lol.

 

[Tigjaw]

I've been convinced to go for the E6600 2.4Ghz conroe sounds nifty to me, but I'm blaming everybody in this forum for spending the extra £100