E6600 VS E4300 Best value chip?

Marky67 · 5 Mar 2007 at 06:38

Looking to put together a new pc for a friend ,built around a E6600 chip & Asus P5N32-E PLUS SLi nForce Motherboard, the pc will be mainly used for downloading and video rendering, do you think the E6600 would be a bit of a waste of money should I get the E4300 with some decent ram and go down the overclocking route? pretty new to overclocking, so will be looking for the easiest & most stable way to go about the build, will there me much in a a jump in performance coming from an Athlon 3000 2.00GHz

Thanks
Mark.

clv101 · 5 Mar 2007 at 07:13

The E6600 is some £100 more expensive than the E4300 and for what? Sure at stock speeds, 2.4GHz vs 1.8GHz and some extra cache it'll be a lot faster but then my E4300 runs at 3.4GHz. If overclocking (and every E4300 should do 3-3.4GHz) then there is not much difference between the two, certainly not £100 worth of difference. The E6600 won't overclock proportionally higher just 'cos its stock speed is higher.

MeatLoaf · 5 Mar 2007 at 07:42

Personally i wouldnt go for the E4300 as they dont tend to clock as well as the E6300.

Also depends on the mobo youre using, if you have a mobo that can do high FSB freqencies then the E6300 is the better choice

clv101 · 5 Mar 2007 at 08:40

MeatLoaf said:
Personally i wouldnt go for the E4300 as they dont tend to clock as well as the E6300.

Also depends on the mobo youre using, if you have a mobo that can do high FSB freqencies then the E6300 is the better choice

Says the man who's running an [email protected] :confused:

Between the E4300 and E6600 the answer is simple (if prepared to overclock). Between the E4300 and E6300, the E4300 is simpler as you don't need monster clocks of the MB as well.

easyrider · 5 Mar 2007 at 09:11

clv101 said:
Says the man who's running an [email protected]

Between the E4300 and E6600 the answer is simple (if prepared to overclock). Between the E4300 and E6300, the E4300 is simpler as you don't need monster clocks of the MB as well.

Stop spouting off about your inferior E4300.

If you have a decent clocking mobo then the 6300 is the better cpu.

Pure and simple.

easyrider · 5 Mar 2007 at 09:12

MeatLoaf said:
Personally i wouldnt go for the E4300 as they dont tend to clock as well as the E6300.

Also depends on the mobo youre using, if you have a mobo that can do high FSB freqencies then the E6300 is the better choice

Thats right.

The 6300 is the better chip.

Just a speed binned 6800

The Running Man · 5 Mar 2007 at 11:58

id get a 6400 - infact i did and its great.

provides the benefits of the 4300 (higher multi) with the quality of the 6300 and save £60 over the 6600!

easyrider · 5 Mar 2007 at 12:06

Nickg said:
id get a 6400 - infact i did and its great.

provides the benefits of the 4300 (higher multi) with the quality of the 6300 and save £60 over the 6600!

Yes I would suggest that too.

I have my 6400 sitting pretty at 3.8ghz

Tooks · 5 Mar 2007 at 13:21

Edit: misread the title - thought it was E4300 vs E6300, not E6600... doh!

WJA96 · 5 Mar 2007 at 13:59

I'm firmly in the 6x00 series camp I'm afraid. I would buy an E6300 over an E4300 every time. And, in my terribly humble opinion, E6400's are the best compromise between overclocking RAM and ultimate speed.

Kaiju · 5 Mar 2007 at 15:17

easyrider said:
Stop spouting off about your inferior E4300.

Was that necessary? The guy was simply giving his opinion based on the OP's question.

Following your posts easyrider is like following wildfire.

Marky67 · 5 Mar 2007 at 17:32

Looks like its going to be an E6300 "LGA775 Allendale" 1.86GHz then, dont think the extra £60 for the E6600 is going to be worth it, just to throw a spanner in the works though, how do you think it would compare to the AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4600+ 2.40GHz (Socket AM2) performance wise, with a mid priced stable board? reading through various threads on the forums the E6300 can be clocked very easy to 3ghz with the right ram and board.

Cheers
Mark.

WJA96 · 5 Mar 2007 at 17:38

Marky67 said:
Looks like its going to be an E6300 "LGA775 Allendale" 1.86GHz then, dont think the extra £60 for the E6600 is going to be worth it, just to throw a spanner in the works though, how do you think it would compare to the AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4600+ 2.40GHz (Socket AM2) performance wise, with a mid priced stable board? reading through various threads on the forums the E6300 can be clocked very easy to 3ghz with the right ram and board.

In benchmarks - the Core2Duos will smash the AMD into little pieces and then smash them up a bit more just for fun. In real lfe, most of my friends who've upgraded are pretty unimpressed to be honest. The slowest thing in your computer is the operator, pressing the keys, followed by your internet connection, then the graphics and then the processor. If it's a completely new PC, then buy the Core2Duo, but if it's an upgrade, then there probably isn't a huge amount of point unless you're benching, encoding DVDs or running massive calculation intensive operations all the time.

WJA96 · 5 Mar 2007 at 17:40

Kaiju said:
Was that necessary? The guy was simply giving his opinion based on the OP's question.

Following your posts easyrider is like following wildfire.

So why chuck a bucket of petrol on them?

He's largely right, he just comes across as aggressive a lot of the time.

easyrider · 5 Mar 2007 at 18:16

WJA96 said:
So why chuck a bucket of petrol on them?

He's largely right, he just comes across as aggressive a lot of the time.

I dont mean to come across as aggressive but these boards are becoming largely predictable.

The answers are there for all to see,Just a little reading about and searching can reap rewards and often help a new member understand the technology better than just being spoon fed answers.

With regards to my comment I will gladly offer the truth based on personal analysis.

telling someone to get a E4300 over a 6300 with a decent clocking mobo is just plain wrong.

Sometimes I just point it out.

easyrider · 5 Mar 2007 at 18:19

Kaiju said:
Was that necessary? The guy was simply giving his opinion based on the OP's question.

Following your posts easyrider is like following wildfire.

The OP asked about what cpu to get with Asus P5N32-E PLUS SLi nForce Motherboard.

The E4300 is not the cpu to get with this mobo.

He will get better clocks and faster performance with a 6300 than any E4300.

Period.

Kaiju · 5 Mar 2007 at 18:29

WJA96 said:
So why chuck a bucket of petrol on them?

He's largely right, he just comes across as aggressive a lot of the time.

Merely trying to bring him back down a peg or two that's all.

E6300 > E4300 with that mobo for sure.

easyrider · 5 Mar 2007 at 18:31

Kaiju said:
Merely trying to bring him back down a peg or two that's all.

E6300 > E4300 with that mobo for sure.

Ill post facts not opinion based on being precious about ones own rig.

Kaiju · 5 Mar 2007 at 18:33

easyrider said:
Ill post facts not opinion based on being precious about ones own rig.

Fair enough.

Marky67 · 5 Mar 2007 at 18:36

O.k decided the E4300 is out of the question now, down to either the E6300 0r the E6600, what would you guys go for if you where building a new rig? will I get the same performance for the £80 cheaper E6300 1.86GHz clock speed, 2MB L2 Cache over the E6600, with the right set up? or is it more "IDIOT" proofed just to go for the £197.39 E6600 with 2.40GHz stock clock speed & 4MB L2 Cache, as I said the p.c will mainly be used for video rendering and downloading, looking for the fastest possible speeds within a budget, i don't mind going for the more expensive chip and cut a few corners on the case etc, if it will give better performance r :confused:

Mark.