X2 4400 and 4600 prices

[JKD]

Hi guys,

Any particular reason why I should be able to find the 4600+ 20 quid cheaper than the 4400?

Cheers.

 

[Goksly]

maybe the higher cache chips are more in demand?

 

[JKD]

That was what I thought - but then I double checked the benchmarks myself. A cast around the net shows the 4600 should be 100 quid or so more expensive.

Oh well - must be an error in my favour for once. w00t!

 

[Xplo]

They are cheaper as they Dont have as much cache as the 440 and like said less demand so less chips sold

 

[Xplo]

although the extra cache is ment to be as good as 200mhz so they must both perfrom the same actually good

 

[StarShock]

just to throw another spanner in the works, I've got to be one of the very few people who actually bought a 4600 despite it having less cache, and one thing I've found about mine, that nobodey seems to have mentioned, is that its a d*mn fine clocker, I got mine up to 2700 on stock cooling, and now that I've switched to an AC freezer 64 pro I've got it up to 2800.

So sure it has less cache but it still performs like a demon

 

[edger]

maybe because less cache = cooler = more room for overclocking (especially on air).

 

[Kesnel]

The Manchester cores do seem to be clocking better than the Toledos.

Regarding cache, you're only going to see that extra 200mhz in cache heavy applications.

 

[mattio1980]

yeah no doubt the 4600+ clocks better but know what iv rather have my 4400+ with 2mb of l2 rather than 1mb on the 4600