• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

2.4c or 3.2e?

R

RexPokinghorn

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Messages
3,055
I currently have a 2.4c but it doesn't OC very well - I can get maybe ~3GHz, but it's not too stable.

I can get a 3.2E for cheap, but I'm not well read on the "E" series. Are they any good in comparison to the C?

Thanks!
 
It will definitely be faster. They just put out a lot of heat. (compared to an equally clocked Northwood)

But you'll probably be able to overclock the 3.2E to the mid/upper 3Ghz range... 3.5-3.7Ghz+ which will definitely be faster than the 3.0 Northwood.
 
RexPokinghorn said:
I currently have a 2.4c but it doesn't OC very well - I can get maybe ~3GHz, but it's not too stable.

I can get a 3.2E for cheap, but I'm not well read on the "E" series. Are they any good in comparison to the C?

Thanks!
Click to expand...

Because of the architectural differences between the Northwood and Prescott cores, the northwood will be faster clock for clock. IMO, it's probably faster clock for next clock up.
Now having said that, a 2.4C @ 3.0 vs a 3.2E would give you negligible gains, if any. And it will definitely make CPU heat an unwelcomed new part of your computer life. So, i would recomend against it.

However, from my own personal experience, as well as what i've seen from many others on this board, the 3.2E chips are terrific OC'ers. Since you're not afraid to OC, i think a 2.4C @ 3.0 vs a 3.2E @lets say 4ghz would be a worthwhile upgrade. I wouldn't trade you my 3.2E for your 2.4C, but if i ran it a stock i would trade a 3.2E for a 3.0C in a second.
 
pigpen said:
Because of the architectural differences between the Northwood and Prescott cores, the northwood will be faster clock for clock. IMO, it's probably faster clock for next clock up.
Now having said that, a 2.4C @ 3.0 vs a 3.2E would give you negligible gains, if any. And it will definitely make CPU heat an unwelcomed new part of your computer life. So, i would recomend against it.

However, from my own personal experience, as well as what i've seen from many others on this board, the 3.2E chips are terrific OC'ers. Since you're not afraid to OC, i think a 2.4C @ 3.0 vs a 3.2E @lets say 4ghz would be a worthwhile upgrade. I wouldn't trade you my 3.2E for your 2.4C, but if i ran it a stock i would trade a 3.2E for a 3.0C in a second.
Click to expand...

Not true, it's not clock-for-clock, it's far from a 1:1 scale, after a set frequency the prescott is faster, but it's closer to 4Ghz, I believe... 3.6, perhaps?
 
ScHpAnKy said:
Not true, it's not clock-for-clock, it's far from a 1:1 scale, after a set frequency the prescott is faster, but it's closer to 4Ghz, I believe... 3.6, perhaps?
Click to expand...
yeah, and at lower than 3.6ghz the northwood is faster clock for clock. id really like to know why hte prescott takes over at over 3.6... perhaps the cache.... but it seems odd that a longer pipelined core would beat out a shorter pipelined core. although, it is only a few stages...
 
lithium726 said:
yeah, and at lower than 3.6ghz the northwood is faster clock for clock. id really like to know why hte prescott takes over at over 3.6... perhaps the cache.... but it seems odd that a longer pipelined core would beat out a shorter pipelined core. although, it is only a few stages...
Click to expand...

I remember Anand theorizing that the prescott would become faster clock for clock over the northwood at some clockspeed, but I thought that was debunked. I've never seen a 4 GHz northwood compared to a 4 GHz prescott. Do you have a link of a benchmark?
 
I upgraded from a 2.4 to a 3.2 recently as well, and yeah its hot as hell, so much so i haven't even tried to oc it, i'm just happy it at least runs stable now
 
Jonsey said:
I remember Anand theorizing that the prescott would become faster clock for clock over the northwood at some clockspeed, but I thought that was debunked. I've never seen a 4 GHz northwood compared to a 4 GHz prescott. Do you have a link of a benchmark?
Click to expand...
no, im in the same boat as you - im wondering why everyone says that...
 
lithium726 said:
no, im in the same boat as you - im wondering why everyone says that...
Click to expand...


I've heard that too. That the prescott will start to pull ahead @3.6. Since the prescott has only officially made it to 3.8, and not many people have those, i've never bothered to check into it. If anybody has a link i'd be interested.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top