Worth changing E6300 - E4300

[FrenchTart]

I went 6400 > 4300 and gained a whole 130 mhz. Wootz :/ (3.2 > 3.33)

It didn't cost me anything. In fact, I think I made some cash back (joys of auction sites to sell old stuff).

It's worth it if your ram is a problem and you're on a ds3/whatever but otherwise there isn't that much point imo.

 

[peetee]

Not in my case - I'm running a E4300 with a DS3 & GeIL 2GB @ 3.2GHz at stock volts.

Grr, i had to up voltage and hit a brick wall at 2.9, im going to shift my arse past it tommorow on day off though!

 

[schumi84]

I am still wondering which to go for, 4300 or 6300.

Just recv'd my DS3 mobo today with a Scythe Ninja Rev B HS/F. Have got the Geil Ultra Low Latency PC6400 2GB Kit.

Looking at the prices there is only £7 between the two, so should I just go straight for the 6300?

Cheers very much.

 

[turboshed]

i am taking the plunge and going from my e6300to a e4300, my motherboard is the limiting factor not the chip, i hit a wall at 3297Mhz (471*7)

I am hoping to get a bit higher with a e4300

 

[peetee]

i am taking the plunge and going from my e6300to a e4300, my motherboard is the limiting factor not the chip, i hit a wall at 3297Mhz (471*7)

I am hoping to get a bit higher with a e4300

Get a new motherboard. Its the limiting factor, not the chip.
A 6300 that goes to 471 is decent, you might not even be able 2 get a 4300 to 3.3, the chip could be a dudd. my 4300 wont budge past 3ghz.

 

[turboshed]

Get a new motherboard. Its the limiting factor, not the chip.
A 6300 that goes to 471 is decent, you might not even be able 2 get a 4300 to 3.3, the chip could be a dudd. my 4300 wont budge past 3ghz.

I got a evga 680i i would have thought thay would have been one of the best boards out

 

[trojan698]

From the results I've seen I'd say don't bother. Most E4300's seem to need more vcore than E6300's to hit the same speeds. I can only imagine this might be down to the manufacturing process - E6300's coming from the same process as X6800's but having half the cache disabled, where E4300's are produced to be just that, 2mb budget chips.

 

[turboshed]

From the results I've seen I'd say don't bother. Most E4300's seem to need more vcore than E6300's to hit the same speeds. I can only imagine this might be down to the manufacturing process - E6300's coming from the same process as X6800's but having half the cache disabled, where E4300's are produced to be just that, 2mb budget chips.

i realise this but i feel i must try it out, i got phase cooling so i can really get that vcore pumping

 

[EvilGrin]

Yep, 3 times. going again to the first wembley gig (well, *** second day, but still effectively the first show ever at the new wembley) in the summer. Am totally obsessed

Saw muse in Aberdeen, was fantastic Was going to get tickets for Wembley for my fiancée's birthday, but decided against it as all the good tickets had gone! ;(

p.s. (Sorry for ot!)

 

[trojan698]

i realise this but i feel i must try it out, i got phase cooling so i can really get that vcore pumping

I was responding to the OP, but yeah if you've got phase go for it!

 

[turboshed]

I was responding to the OP, but yeah if you've got phase go for it!

ah ok, thought it was to me, i should be able to pick one up next week and will post up results

 

[Kaiju]

The 4300 is only the cpu to get if:

a, you have slowish ram
b, you have a limited clocking mobo

Thats it

In comparison to a E6300, I totally agree.

Either CPU will take advantage of fastish RAM/good clockin' mobo and hit 3GHz+

 

[jrodga2k5]

The 4300 is only the cpu to get if:

a, you have slowish ram
b, you have a limited clocking mobo

Thats it

Quoted for truth, I cant be bothered changing mobo cos I have OEM windows XP and Vista so an e4300 will let me reach 2.8GHz whereas my current e6300 will only get me to 2.33ghz stable

 

[peetee]

cant you ring microsoft or something and tell them your motherboard is being changed because its incompatible with something? or broken?
Thought you could

 

[pegasus1]

Quoted for truth, I cant be bothered changing mobo cos I have OEM windows XP and Vista so an e4300 will let me reach 2.8GHz whereas my current e6300 will only get me to 2.33ghz stable

Ive got OEM XP and i changed from 3700SD/Asus A8N sli delux to C2D/Asus P5n-e sli and just booted up into windows, changed the chipset drivers and connected to the microsoft auto activation website. No hasle and took about 20 seconds (the activation not the changing of mobo's ).
My lads PC is on its 3rd mobo with the same OEM XP.

 

[mattpj]

I have a different dilemma, i have a 4300 and wonder if i should have got a 6300.. even though i am happy with the 4300.. lol

 

[w3bbo]

Don't bother imo - your next upgrade should be a quadcore.

 

[mattpj]

Thats absolutely fine mate, the next upgrade should be a quadcore but if you can swap around something at hardly any cost and get some satisfaction i do not see the problem

 

[peetee]

im wondering sometimes whether to upgrade to a 6300. But to be honest, 4300 @ 3.0 on each core is great. Do you actually NEED the extra performance? Will you actually notice it?

My 4300s also only pencilled in to last me till quadcore becomes the new dual core.

 

[pegasus1]

Don't bother imo - your next upgrade should be a quadcore.

How far down the line will that essential upgrade be, there is little that offers benefits for 64bit CPu's let alone dual core or quad core.
I think Intel/AMD are running out of ways to convince people to upgrade (I mean marketting to the average joe) so as the mhz wars have come to an end, lets start the core wars.