E6300 vs E6600

[Slinky1989]

Right, I need to have an arguement settled and I'm hoping that you can help

Me and my big brother were arguing about which would be a better cpu for over clocking.

My big brother argued that the E6300 is much better as it's better value for money and that you can clock it to e6600 speeds and higher and that cache doesn't make all the difference.

I argued that the E6600 is a true conroe and has double the amount of cache of the allendale. Also being already at higher stock speeds it should technically clock higher.

So does cache make a difference?
Would an e6600 being cooled by an AC 7 pro clock higher than an e6300 under the same set up?

What sort of performance differences would you see in gaming between the two?

cheers

 

[durbs]

I'd heard that the 6400 is the sweet spot for clocking due to the higher multiplier (so to answer your argument - neither of them) but i've not got a Core2 so could be completely wrong.

 

[Cupra]

yes it will clock higher my e6600 is @ 3.8ghz so id reccomend that.. if you were able to get an e6300 to that speed you would be very lucky and have some massive cooling and some top spec ram

a the e6600 doesnt need massive fsb for high clocks

 

[BlairH]

a the e6600 doesnt need massive fsb for high clocks

It doesn't even need massive voltage either. 3.2Ghz on stock volts EASY.

 

[musx64]

Both are good clockers

both are termed conroe cpus

both are are capable of 3.2+ w/ a good motherboard, memory and cooler

The only difference the 4mg cache is known to be better in encoding and some people say - slight better overclock. But saying that some cpu steppings will overclock 100-200mhz more.

Regarding gaming, some 6600 owners have said their is a peformance increase in games.

 

[Darg]

performance per pound the E6300 is best, performance overall then the E6600 is best.

You should reach 3.2Ghz with a E6300. That;s about 457FSB which most RAM and motherboards can do if you get a decent pair.

With a E6600 if you're lucky you'll reach 3.8 like above though most would top out around 3.6 it seems.

If you want to pay twice the price for about a 12% increase in Mhz then go for it. I personally would recommend the E6300 as you just can't beat the performance at that price.

 

[richjs]

It doesn't even need massive voltage either. 3.2Ghz on stock volts EASY.

What's stock voltage on a 6300? I'm running one at 3.1GHZ on 1.280v, but I haven't got around to tightening it.

 

[Darg]

My stock is 1.28, Some use 1.32 I believe.

 

[andyh]

What's stock voltage on a 6300? I'm running one at 3.1GHZ on 1.280v, but I haven't got around to tightening it.

Stock volts on a e6300 is 1.325v, but like yours I am running at 3.1ghz at 1.280v.

 

[kingo15]

how did yar get 3.1 on volts like that i cant seem to manage that for some reason

 

[cobxx]

Yeah, the 6300 should get to 3.2-3.3, and compared to what the 6600 might get...of around 3.6-3.7 if you're lucky, it's not worth the price for budget systems considering the performance increase isn't going to be huge. The difference in cache can affect some apps like games and m$ office by up to 10%, then other apps have no increase. I'm still holding out till 22nd april so I can grab a 6300/6400 with the extra cache and no extra cost

 

[Scoobie Dave]

Yeah, the 6300 should get to 3.2-3.3, and compared to what the 6600 might get...of around 3.6-3.7 if you're lucky, it's not worth the price for budget systems considering the performance increase isn't going to be huge. The difference in cache can affect some apps like games and m$ office by up to 10%, then other apps have no increase. I'm still holding out till 22nd april so I can grab a 6300/6400 with the extra cache and no extra cost

Indeed. E6420 will be my next purchase.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

the only processor I ever overclocked was a celeron 300A many years ago and I did try an AMD 486DX100 but got nowhere.

Anybody know what the real world difference would be between a 6300, 6400 and 6600 if say for instance you were encoding an AVI to DVD and it took 30 mins on the 6300?
What would the times be for a 6400 and 6600?

 

[Darg]

All overclocked to the same speed or at stock? At stock I'd say there would be quite a noticeable jump from 6400 to 6600 but not so much between the 6300 and 6400. That's mainly due to the 4mb cache that is supposed to help video encoding quite a lot. Still though I'd be surprised if the difference was more then 5 minutes or so using your example.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

I've just found this http://tomshardware.co.uk/2007/03/26/the_gigahertz_battle_uk/page13.html and it looks like there might not be that much difference between my P4 3.6 and a 6600.