Intel Pricing?

[Netvyper]

I've been scouting around a bit for a new chip for a 2nd gaming rig im putting together. I've got a large majority of the other components now; but a CPU is proving difficult. Why? Intel's Pricing structure seems a little... odd.

Basically I want to spend in the region of £50-70 on a chip, I figured i'd be able to pick up an e6600 or similar for this now; but its proving damn difficult. I can only seem to find the 2000 & 4000 series cut down chips . However there's a whole flood of chips, of different types & specs within the £100-140 bracket. Specifically, your into quad territory here. I mean why would you want a 2.6ghz or 3ghz dual core, over a quad that'll clock to 3-3.2ghz anyhow, if the prices are virtually identical?

I just wondered if there were likely to be any price drops/adjustments coming up to correct this, or if we're relegated to >£100 only for any sensible chips?

I just think that intel could make a killing with lower clocked, decent cache chips for overclocking at a £65 price point.

 

[Ben M]

the 5200 is a decent chip at that price, yes it's 2Mb L2 cache, but it'll still be a great performing chip, especially after an overclock.

 

[Netvyper]

I was really disappointed with the E2180 in my media box. Admittedly running at stock, but it wont even play back 1080p HD without stuttering

I assume the 7200 is a less good overclocker, owing to the higher fsb & lower multi?

 

[VTR]

If it's for gaming then get a Wolfdale chip. Depending on budget the E7200, E8400, E8500 or E8600. Quad cores are wasted with 99% of games at the moment, a higher clocked Wolfdale is the way to go.

If your budget is £50-£70 I'd stretch the extra £18 and get the E7200.

The E7200 and E8400 should get you ~4Ghz and the E8500 and E8600 4Ghz+ depending on memory and cooling etc obviously.

 

[Netvyper]

Well; putting a quad in my main box is the 2nd best upgrade i've ever made, 2nd only to my 24" Screen

But I dont really want to spend that much on this box; I picked up a P35 board on the MM, and a Case to house it in. I've got a Hiper 580w PSU, 2900XT, 2gb Corsair 6400 Ram lying spare atm. I'll have a scout around and see what I can get the e7200 for, but its still cut down; and even 2nd hand e8400s are going at £85+.

 

[Tooks]

I'm still puzzled as to why anybody would buy a dual over a quad if they were the same price???

Sure, quads aren't fully used in games at the moment, but that's changing.

Yes, a clocked wolfdale will net you a few fps over a 3Ghz+ quad, but the benefits of the quad for the other things you do with a pc should be more beneficial.

What, exactly, does a dual core do differently to two cores being used on a quad?

I don't want to open the old quad vs dual debate yet again, but just as people are challenged for recommending quads, then it should be the same for folks recommending 'duals for gaming'...

 

[VTR]

I went for a dual as I can run it at 4.3Ghz, where as most quads I see are doing 3.2-3.6Ghz and the extra 700-1100mhz defently helps in games. I had a C2D at 3.33Ghz previously and at 4.3Ghz now there is a massive difference.

 

[Tooks]

I went for a dual as I can run it at 4.3Ghz, where as most quads I see are doing 3.2-3.6Ghz and the extra 700-1100mhz defently helps in games. I had a C2D at 3.33Ghz previously and at 4.3Ghz now there is a massive difference.

Define 'massive' for me please?

Do you mean in min/avg/max frame rates?

 

[eyetrip]

From my personal experience, not much diff between my Q6600 at 3.2 and e8500/e5200 at 3.8 for actual gaming - not benchmarks, but proper gaming.

 

[Netvyper]

got me a Xigmatek S1283... gonna drop that on my e2180 & see how it goes for gaming/clocking... will then decide dual/quad... might even be able to justify some extra cash by then, thanks for the input people.

 

[pastymuncher]

got me a Xigmatek S1283... gonna drop that on my e2180 & see how it goes for gaming/clocking... will then decide dual/quad... might even be able to justify some extra cash by then, thanks for the input people.

If you have a really good stepping then 3.6Ghz is possible. I have done this myself on a Gigabyte P31 DS3L.

Personally i would have gone for a E5200 as it has double the cache of the E2180 and is clocked at 2.5Ghz with a 12.5x multiplier. Cheap 4Ghz potential with those. It's also a 45nm process (cut down Wolfdale cores) so it would be cooler and more power efficient too.

 

[Netvyper]

I have a 2180 from a different box; if I were having to buy new, then yeah, a 5200 at least

 

[manic111]

I agree with Ben-go for the 5200 at that price point.

If you can spend a little more go with the 7200.

 

[Vir]

I'm still puzzled as to why anybody would buy a dual over a quad if they were the same price???

Sure, quads aren't fully used in games at the moment, but that's changing.

Yes, a clocked wolfdale will net you a few fps over a 3Ghz+ quad, but the benefits of the quad for the other things you do with a pc should be more beneficial.

What, exactly, does a dual core do differently to two cores being used on a quad?

I don't want to open the old quad vs dual debate yet again, but just as people are challenged for recommending quads, then it should be the same for folks recommending 'duals for gaming'...

I agree with you that choosing a Q6600 over a 65nm C2D would be a not so wise decision at this point but a 45nm C2D is another story.

Then again a Q9xxx over a E8xxx has a price difference as well