Which to go for C2D 4300 or 6300

[clv101]

Exactly. For a lot of people, to get over 3.2 on a 6300 you'll need a FSB of 450 compared to just needing 350 on a 4300, which makes the 4300 the better choice. Not to mention the need for added fans/heatsinks to keep the NB cool. Some people just want to overclock without all the fuss of extra cooling, expensive ram etc. Too many board members disregard the 4300 just because it's potential is 100-200 mhz less than a 6300. But considering it might cost you £50+ for the better ram, mobo, cooling etc just to get a few hundred mhz out of it (which won't have any affect, really), the 4300 is an excellent chip.

Well said, E4300 for an easy life. Mine jumped up to 3.4GHz on a P5N-E without any effort at all.

 

[pastymuncher]

Got myself a Gigabyte 965P DS3P after my Abit 650i fiasco and have currently got my 4300 running at 3.4ghz Orthos stable for 5 1/2 hours so far. Won't be totally happy until it's passed 8 hours but it's looking good so far. My first clock with it was straight up to 3.2ghz. No problems at all and was Orthos stable for over 8 hours. It might even hit 3.6ghz at this rate. I certainly have'nt hit any problems so far. I am well happy with this cpu. At £99 it was also quite a bit cheaper than the 6300. You don't need to spend more when you get a bargain clocker like this. It has also been the easiest cpu and board i have ever had to clock.

 

[Darg]

From benchmarks that I've seen the E6300 will always perform better with memory bandwidth tests then the 4300. This is due to the 1066FSB instead of the 800FSB on the CPU. With regards to CPU tests they will perform almost identically at the same speed. However I would go for the E6300 for the increased memory performance.

 

[cobxx]

From benchmarks that I've seen the E6300 will always perform better with memory bandwidth tests then the 4300. This is due to the 1066FSB instead of the 800FSB on the CPU. With regards to CPU tests they will perform almost identically at the same speed. However I would go for the E6300 for the increased memory performance.

Having the lower multi means the E6300 potentially can have increased memory performance. You can always drop the 4300 multi to 7 and treat it like a 6300 though! If you do that though, you might as well just buy a 6300 though, due to the possibility of getting a much better processor that's just had the cache disabled.

I'm pretty sure these days intel have got pretty efficient with their manufacturing, so effectively a lot of 6300's could be 6700's. Well, assuming you've got a conroe. Now with all these allendale cores, the 4300 can seem the better buy; if your gonna be getting an allendale core, you might as well get one with a higher multi...

 

[peetee]

4300 for the easy life that doesnt put any other factors into your overclock.
6300 for a more hardened overclocker, whos better at it and a lot more patient.

the 6300 only pulls away from the 4300 at higher overclocks. 4300 is easy overclocking but then you hit a brickwall, the 6300 doesnt hit the brick wall, it just gradually gets harder. Possibility motherboard or ram wont allow the 6300 to hit as high speeds as the 4300 too.

Either way, you cant go wrong. 4300 for the less seasoned overclocker, 6300 for the more weathered

 

[Chris Beard]

I've gone away and done the maths. I take it back - the E6300 is the better chip for those willing to spend the time.

Maths for those who care:

I put a link to another thread in my previous post.

In that thread AC_64 mentions a circa 40 FSB before memory throughput recovers from the strap change over 400Mhz on some of the 965P boards.

So, at 2.8Ghz a E6300 is running at 400Mhz and an E4300 is running at 311Mhz(ish).

The E6300 then takes 40Mhz FSB to recover (for simplicity we could consider this a 40Mhz FSB 'hit'). The E6300 at 2.835Ghz runs at an FSB of 405 with the 40 Mhz penalty the memory throughput should be the same(ish) as running the E6300 at an FSB of 365. At 2.835Ghz the E4300 runs at an FSB of 315 which even given the strap change is less memory throughput.

To make a big enough difference the strap change would have to give a 90Mhz FSB performance hit on memory throughput.

 

[Nymins]

4300 for the easy life that doesnt put any other factors into your overclock.
6300 for a more hardened overclocker, whos better at it and a lot more patient.

the 6300 only pulls away from the 4300 at higher overclocks. 4300 is easy overclocking but then you hit a brickwall, the 6300 doesnt hit the brick wall, it just gradually gets harder. Possibility motherboard or ram wont allow the 6300 to hit as high speeds as the 4300 too.

Either way, you cant go wrong. 4300 for the less seasoned overclocker, 6300 for the more weathered

Im in the same situation. Im gonna by some cheap ram like PC2-5400 or PC2-6400 which will probably not overclock well. I dont know much about memory timings or anything so if i get the E4300 and put it in my Gigabyte GA 965P-S3 motherboard, will i need to change memory timings or lower the memory speed at all when i go to overclock? Or can i just keep upping the FSB on the processor until it becomes unstable?

 

[cobxx]

Im in the same situation. Im gonna by some cheap ram like PC2-5400 or PC2-6400 which will probably not overclock well. I dont know much about memory timings or anything so if i get the E4300 and put it in my Gigabyte GA 965P-S3 motherboard, will i need to change memory timings or lower the memory speed at all when i go to overclock? Or can i just keep upping the FSB on the processor until it becomes unstable?

If you get the 6400 ram, you are going to be almost certian the ram won't be overclocked. 6400 can run at 400FSB, which gives a speed of 3.6ghz with the 4300. I don't think any 4300's have gone that high under non exotic cooling, or if so, not very many. So DS3 and some 6400 and a 4300 will be a simple upping the FSB until it becomes unstable (then adding voltage, testing, etc.)

 

[Nymins]

If you get the 6400 ram, you are going to be almost certian the ram won't be overclocked. 6400 can run at 400FSB, which gives a speed of 3.6ghz with the 4300. I don't think any 4300's have gone that high under non exotic cooling, or if so, not very many. So DS3 and some 6400 and a 4300 will be a simple upping the FSB until it becomes unstable (then adding voltage, testing, etc.)

Cool. Thanks for the info

 

[silversurfer]

Why spend all that money and flake out on a stock cooler. The cheapest component is deciding your entire decision?
Spend a bit of money on an AC 7 and rethink things.

Cobox if slow ram is a consideration then get an async chipset like the 650i. I ran my rig at 3.5ghz with pc4200 ram and it did just fine.
No need for a high multipler unless the motherboard itself cant take the fsb, like one of those asrock boards

 

[cobxx]

Why spend all that money and flake out on a stock cooler. The cheapest component is deciding your entire decision?
Spend a bit of money on an AC 7 and rethink things.

Cobox if slow ram is a consideration then get an async chipset like the 650i. I ran my rig at 3.5ghz with pc4200 ram and it did just fine.
No need for a high multipler unless the motherboard itself cant take the fsb, like one of those asrock boards

Exactly, that's why the 650i chipsets seem so good to me. But most people just wanna go down the tried and tested route of DS3. Nothing wrong with that, but IMO the 650i is the better chipset.

 

[clv101]

Exactly, that's why the 650i chipsets seem so good to me. But most people just wanna go down the tried and tested route of DS3. Nothing wrong with that, but IMO the 650i is the better chipset.

Same here, I've had great experiences with my 650i. Native PATA as well!

 

[Big.Wayne]

Spend a bit of money on an AC 7 and rethink things

The Arctic Cooler Freezer 7 Pro is junk!

Put another £10-£15 into the budget and get yourself something nice

 

[peetee]

it performs well especially for the price, you're basically suggesting getting something twice as expensive, well duh theyre bound to be better

 

[FrostedNipple]

get the 4300, u can easily get 3gigz from it same cache but its like way much cheaper

 

[peetee]

i think we'v established throughout other threads cache hardly makes a difference, the FSB and multipliers are what you focus on between 6300 & 4300, coupled with voltages and temperatures. Its under £10 cheaper, 'way much' my ****. Both are great, if you're content with 3ghz or there abouts go for a 4300, its a lot easier to hit that. If you want to try and go for more it becomes harder, and hotter, but its easier with a 6300 after about 3.2ghz i beleive, but requires a decent motherboard&decent ram.