E6300 (1.86GHz Conroe) vs Pentium 805 (2.66GHz Smithfield)

[darude]

E6300 (1.86GHz Conroe) vs Pentium 805 (2.66GHz Smithfield)
I think the simple answer is Conroe wins....

I have someone looking to buy my system for the same price I paid..
Question is... is it worth spending an extra £100 (?) or so to get the Conroe E6300 or shall I simply keep the D805 I already have?

Does anyone know what the performance differences are?
Another question... is there a mobo out there that supports both D805 and E6300?

Cheers guys

 

[LanceCrossfire]

805 are great value for money, but so are E6300's, i reckon that the E6300 being made on a smaller process and with a shorter instruction pipeline, will outperform the 805... the intel 975XBX is compatible with both out of the box, as is the ASrock, DFI and the 965 chipset gigabyte offerings...

 

[Indy500]

E6300 by miles. It even beats the 965EE Presler in some benchmarks.

 

[Raikiri]

The 6300 on average is as fast as your 805... at stock when your 805 is at 3.8ghz. They overclock very well, with good air cooling you should see 2.5-2.6 before your board gives up then theres always volt mods etc.

At those speeds it would be far faster than an FX60

 

[darude]

The 6300 on average is as fast as your 805... at stock when your 805 is at 3.8ghz. They overclock very well, with good air cooling you should see 2.5-2.6 before your board gives up then theres always volt mods etc.

At those speeds it would be far faster than an FX60

Thanks, does that mean if I move from what I have to E6300 and paying an extra £100-150, I'm downgrading? I guess we're not comparing OC'd 6300 to OC'd 805 here.

Some results of OC'd 6300 here - http://xtreview.com/review132.htm (don't know how real they are)

 

[LanceCrossfire]

Thanks, does that mean if I move from what I have to E6300 and paying an extra £100-150, I'm downgrading? I guess we're not comparing OC'd 6300 to OC'd 805 here.

Some results of OC'd 6300 here - http://xtreview.com/review132.htm (don't know how real they are)

no... hes saying that a stock E6300 is faster the your OC'd 805...

 

[Raikiri]

Surely the 'far faster than an fx60' part gave that away?

 

[darude]

no... hes saying that a stock E6300 is faster the your OC's 805...

Ah okay

So, in terms of cost, it's worth sticking to the 805.
But from a new buyer point of view.. is it worth going for the E6300 instead of the 805?

 

[LanceCrossfire]

you probably wouldnt notice the difference tbh...unless you run benchmarks or render etc...

 

[Indy500]

Conroe runs much cooler and consumes less power.

 

[Tooks]

I've been having similar thoughts about changing my 940 for an E6300, but looking around at benchies, gaming apart, the E6300 seems to be only around 10% faster in most things. That's with the E6300 at stock though, so overclocking it would give a bigger gap.

But, to stop it getting too expensive, I'd be looking at something like the Asrock board which I believe might struggle to get the FSB high enough to overclock the E6300 past 2.1Ghz...

Choosing a better board is the solution I guess, but then I'm looking at a lot more cash.

If I brought an E6300, and like a lot of people I'm probably only considering that particular chip because it MAY be available in a couple of days, I'd start to yearn after a E6600 or similar!

The heat and power thing is something to consider though, but my 940 runs a lot cooler than my 805 anyway, but then if you're going to overclock the Conroe folks on here are seeing some high temps too...

As ever, decisions decisions!!