worth getting E8500 over E8400?

is there much difference?

Only difference is the multi.
E8500 = 9.5x
E8400 = 9x

You'll get a bit better OC with the E8500, theoretically.

Less mhz for the buck, not worth it IMHO.

nope

HELL NO.

the 8500 is a fools cpu. well not really, but you know what i'm trying to say.

The difference is 0.16GHz, and the 9.5 multi........for the extra dollars, there is no way it's worth it. You can overclock the crap out of the E8400 and save your money to put in graphics cards, better memory, or a better board.

NOT worth it all.

You ONLY get 1/2 multiplier higher.

So even at a very high FSB like 400-500, that will ONLY give you 200-250Mhz higher. Not really with it IMHO.

Now if it has a whole multiplier higher, maybe.

the e8600 might be worth it tho, for those who deem it. 3.3ghz reference is nice

8500 is like the ppl wasting money on a 6850 over 6750 for 100 more ;/

Originally Posted by Nicksterr

the e8600 might be worth it tho, for those who deem it. 3.3ghz reference is nice

That is sometime down the line though, your looking at Q3 2008 for that.

Strictly speaking in hardcore overclocking (where "worth it" conversations go out the window) the E8500 can and has shown a significant improvement over the E8400. Some folks are going so far as to say that the E8500's have been binned in such a way that is allowing them to reach higher overclocks easier - not just because of the .5 multi.

For no overclocking or mild overclocking, it would be silly to do the E8500 for $100 more - both chips will pretty much do 4.0Ghz. For extreme overclockers though, it's a real tough choice. These new 45nm chips do not like the higher bus speeds when compared to the 65nm's, so that .5 more multi makes even more of a difference when OC'd at the limit. Not to mention some guys are getting a LOT lower voltage requirements to OC their E8500's vs. the E8400's...

I'm still torn...

Yes, but how much is that 200 mhz difference going to affect you? None at all outside of benchmarks. You're not going to notice the difference to justify the premium. e8500 is slightly better, but not value wise.

At any rate, most people upgrade well before their cpu's fail (on these forums anyway). Who cares if you have to raise voltage. As far as electric bill as a result of that, it's pennies on the dollar. Thats like a difference of 1 or 2 packs of smokes over a year.

Originally Posted by Xaijin

Yes, but how much is that 200 mhz difference going to affect you? None at all outside of benchmarks. You're not going to notice the difference to justify the premium. e8500 is slightly better, but not value wise.

At any rate, most people upgrade well before their cpu's fail (on these forums anyway). Who cares if you have to raise voltage. As far as electric bill as a result of that, it's pennies on the dollar. Thats like a difference of 1 or 2 packs of smokes over a year.

Exactly.

Some folks have a lot more fun money to blow than others, keep in mind. And for some, the hobby IS that last little bit they can squeeze out, so to speak. These "worth it" threads are always relative. They should be titled "bang for the buck" instead.

E8500 binned higher for stock Mhz.

For regular daily task on computer then E8400 is the way to go.

I think the e8400 is enough.

Originally Posted by Brahmzy

Some folks have a lot more fun money to blow than others, keep in mind. And for some, the hobby IS that last little bit they can squeeze out, so to speak. These "worth it" threads are always relative. They should be titled "bang for the buck" instead.

This is known as the more money then sense syndrome. I can choose to buy more exspensive CPU's if I want to but yet I still try and be smart about what I buy.

Originally Posted by anime4u

I think the e8400 is enough.

More is better, and Greed is good..other wise I would have stopped with my P3..lol

Originally Posted by Brahmzy

Strictly speaking in hardcore overclocking (where "worth it" conversations go out the window) the E8500 can and has shown a significant improvement over the E8400. Some folks are going so far as to say that the E8500's have been binned in such a way that is allowing them to reach higher overclocks easier - not just because of the .5 multi.

For no overclocking or mild overclocking, it would be silly to do the E8500 for $100 more - both chips will pretty much do 4.0Ghz. For extreme overclockers though, it's a real tough choice. These new 45nm chips do not like the higher bus speeds when compared to the 65nm's, so that .5 more multi makes even more of a difference when OC'd at the limit. Not to mention some guys are getting a LOT lower voltage requirements to OC their E8500's vs. the E8400's...

I'm still torn...

Yes, this is right on the money. If you're a die-hard overclock fanatic that has the money, and strictly goes for record breaking, the E8500 is worth the money just to get the higher number. Otherwise, the E8400 is the best choice for everyone else.

I was wondering exactly this on thursday night when i saw stocks of both for 1st time. Being a yorkshire man living in scotland , i'd live up to my reputaion & save £50 with the 8400

Intel E8400 Wolfdale Am pleased with the cpu but not too impressed with Abit see the Hazards link

luck