1 Feb 2007 at 10:57 #22 melbourne720 melbourne720 Associate Joined 26 Sep 2006 Posts 1,945 Location West Bridgford If you were concerned you could even get a e4300 as that has a stock FSB of 800, and run it on a 1:2.
If you were concerned you could even get a e4300 as that has a stock FSB of 800, and run it on a 1:2.
1 Feb 2007 at 11:10 #23 jimbos jimbos Associate OP Joined 29 Jan 2007 Posts 98 hmm..... which in your opinion would be the best for highest performance. i probably wont go near overclocking to start with (although i will look into it) will i get better performance with cpu 800 and memory 800 1:2 or cpu 1066 and 800 memory?
hmm..... which in your opinion would be the best for highest performance. i probably wont go near overclocking to start with (although i will look into it) will i get better performance with cpu 800 and memory 800 1:2 or cpu 1066 and 800 memory?
1 Feb 2007 at 11:13 #24 melbourne720 melbourne720 Associate Joined 26 Sep 2006 Posts 1,945 Location West Bridgford At stock the 6300 will be faster, no doubt. You could probably overclock the e4300 to 6300 speeds and beyond though, with a half decent cooler.
At stock the 6300 will be faster, no doubt. You could probably overclock the e4300 to 6300 speeds and beyond though, with a half decent cooler.
1 Feb 2007 at 11:18 #25 Apatche64 Apatche64 Associate Joined 8 Dec 2003 Posts 697 Location alsager, near crewe melbourne720 said: At stock the 6300 will be faster, no doubt. You could probably overclock the e4300 to 6300 speeds and beyond though, with a half decent cooler. Click to expand... you can overclock the e4300 to mad speeds, dont worry about that.
melbourne720 said: At stock the 6300 will be faster, no doubt. You could probably overclock the e4300 to 6300 speeds and beyond though, with a half decent cooler. Click to expand... you can overclock the e4300 to mad speeds, dont worry about that.