• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

CPU upgrade from E2180

Associate
Joined
9 Mar 2006
Posts
1,519
Hi,

I'm looking for an affordable CPU upgrade from my now outdated E2180. The CPU has recently become the weakest link in my system;

Gigabyte P35-DS3R
4GB Hyper-x
4870 1GB

My current CPU will no doubt be holding me back in recent games, so I intend to release the "bottleneck". Hence I'm not after a top of the range CPU, just something which would seem reasonable when compared to the rest of the system.

Any suggestions?

Cheers.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
12 Jul 2005
Posts
19,650
Location
Aberlour, NE Scotland
Either a E8400 or a cheap quad. E8000 series are demon clockers. E5000/6300 series Pentium dual cores will be a bit of a upgrade but not as big as the first two i suggested. The Pentium dual cores do clock well though, especially the new E6300. I have one at 4Ghz and it did 3.6Ghz in the same board as yours. See my dual core comparison thread to have a rough idea of the gains.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
20 Apr 2006
Posts
2,022
Location
Leeds, UK
If buying new, a 'cheap' quad really isn't the best thing, as although most of them are based on 45nm Yorkfield, they have small cache sizes compared to even the older Q6600.

Since the Q9450 is no longer listed, if you want a decent quad either pick up a second hand Q6600 or get a Q9550. Depends on your budget.

If your happy with a dual, Pastymunchers advice is good to follow. I'd agree with his sentiments and go for an E8xxx series.
 
Associate
Joined
31 Jul 2009
Posts
2,188
Location
127.0.0.1
I've got the 2.8GHz E6300 as well @ 3.7GHz stock volts. Its a great bargain. Especially at £55 ish. You will most definately see a massive improvement
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Oct 2002
Posts
6,242
Location
Portsmouth
Yeah but the lack of cache really holds them back, and tbh dual core isn't exactly cutting edge anymore. I used to have a 2180 at 3Ghz and my replacement Q6600 spanked it in everything I threw at it.

I'd say a bargain Q6600 or Q9450/Q9550 is your best bet for performance.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
10,869
Location
Bristol
Yeah but the lack of cache really holds them back...

Does it really? Look at pastymuncher's numbers, The E2xxx, E4xxx, E5xxx, E6xxx, E8xxx, when all running at 3GHz are remarkably similar (E8xxx only 10-20% faster). In most real world situations I doubt you'd tell the difference between an 3GHz E2xxx and 3GHz E8xxx chip, cache just isn't that big a deal.

In most real world situations 3GHz C2D is a 3GHz C2D, whether it's an E2xxx or an E8xxx.

Obviously the Quads are the different story (on tasks that support them).

If the OP hasn't overclocked, then that's the first thing he should do. I have my E2160 at 3.2GHz in the same Gigabyte board. If he's already there AND if he's doing stuff that benefits from a quad core, then think about putting a 45nm quad core in - and overclock at least as far as the old E2180.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
24 Oct 2002
Posts
6,242
Location
Portsmouth
Does it really? Look at pastymuncher's numbers, The E2xxx, E4xxx, E5xxx, E6xxx, E8xxx, when all running at 3GHz are remarkably similar (E8xxx only 10-20% faster). In most real world situations I doubt you'd tell the difference between an 3GHz E2xxx and 3GHz E8xxx chip, cache just isn't that big a deal.

In most real world situations 3GHz C2D is a 3GHz C2D, whether it's an E2xxx or an E8xxx.

Not so, theres plenty of articles about that show for gaming at any rate that the 1mb cache models are crippled in comparison compared to those with 2mb and above. I know first hand as I had one.

Some figures here though http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Intel-Pentium-Dual-Core-E2140-overclocking,review-29816-22.html It shows a E2140 at 3.5Ghz still getting bested by E6750's at stock speeds.

Even the E5000 series is a decent step up, but for me the E7000 chips are where price and performance reach their peak. They have the right combination of cache and performance vs price.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
10,869
Location
Bristol
I figured for gaming, especially a C2D at 3.0GHz+, performance as mostly limited by graphics not CPU?

Your link is also rather strange. It shows the E2140 at 3.0GHz a good bit faster than the E2140 at 3.5GHz! Poor choice of evidence to make your point.

However, in the non-gaming benchmarks the overclocked E2140 is awesome, faster than all but the quads in some tests, top of the CS3 test etc...

So yeah, it depends what you're doing. I would argue that apart from gaming, the extra cache isn't very important and at settings people choose to play at, most folk will be more graphics card limited than CPU cache limited making the benefit small.

Sure, they'll be an exception where someone has a top line graphics setup and would benefit from extra CPU cache, but that's a small minority of people.

Going back to the OP. Overcloking his E2180 from stock to 3.2-3.4GHz is easy and by far the best idea. The only CPU it's worth upgrading to would be a 45nm quad, and then only if he does stuff which takes advantage of the quad. For all other things an overclocked E2xxx is more than fine.
 
Top Bottom