• 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.

6300 vs 6600

S

se1zure

Weaksauce
Joined
Nov 14, 2006
Messages
80
Whoch is better for you rmoney? the 6300 or the 6600. I understand the 6300 is highly overclockable, but the 6600 is too, right? I want whichever one is faster, and I don't have any experience overclocking, but if i could overclock teh 6300 faster than the 6600 overclocked, then I may just go with the 6300!
 
The E6300 is the better one to get if you're going to overclock. Most of all the C2D systems are topping out around 3.6-3.8Ghz.

Both of those chips overclock about the same, you just start lower down with the 6300 and gain more as opposed to the 6600.

The 6300 is the overclockers bang for the buck chip.
 
6600s will, on average, hit a higher maximum overclock than an 6300.

If you're going for anything over 3.4ghz, a 6600 is really your only option.
 
honestly, i think the 6600 B chips are much better than 6300s for clocking these days
 
I honestly have no exprience overlcoccking, so I wouldn't expect to get anything more than .5ghz from my crappy overcloking skills.. If I can get the e6300 to 3 ghz, then I'll be happy to go with that, otherwise, te 6600 is easily able to get to 3 ghz f rom the stock air cooling they give. I don't want to spend extra on water cooling so i can make what would be a $150 processor, use $500 cooling, and I could have just got the e6600 to begin with, IMO.
 
I kept seeing all these wondeful 3.6 on low v w/ 66's...so I caved and you should too. :p

I wouldn't call it skills. If you can read an research, you'll find many excellent guides. Keep in mind they're a little like spyware removal tools. What one doesn't get, the other will hit on. Good luck!
 
Boltaction said:
Why?

450x8= 3.6ghz, which is the multi for the e6400.
Click to expand...

Most of the E6400's dont hit more than 3.4, according to the overclocking database...

Only like 12 have made it past 3.4... And the average is 3290mhz...

Using simple stats, you can see that the probability of getting 3.4+

P(x > 3.4) = 1- P(x <= 3.4)

= 1 - .7517

= 0.2483 or 24.83% chance to get above 3.4...

For the E6600... The same equation gives us

= 1-.5398

= .46 or a 46% chance of getting over 3.4...
 
Arcygenical said:
Most of the E6400's dont hit more than 3.4, according to the overclocking database...

Only like 12 have made it past 3.4... And the average is 3290mhz...

Using simple stats, you can see that the probability of getting 3.4+

P(x > 3.4) = 1- P(x <= 3.4)

= 1 - .7517

= 0.2483 or 24.83% chance to get above 3.4...

For the E6600... The same equation gives us

= 1-.5398

= .46 or a 46% chance of getting over 3.4...
Click to expand...

Holy crap, were you a math major :D I really think that the E6400 is the OC'ers dream chip, not really the 6600 although it does scale well, just takes a better cooling method, and slightly more Vcore. I am getting a E6600 to replace my E6300 (I love my E6300) I just want the 4mb cache, and hope to OC somewhere within the 3.3 - 3.4GHz range I think should be doable.
 
6600 "B" chips are clocking with lower voltage than As, much lower. I think they're much more likely to hit 3.6 and that 4mb cache does make a difference
 
i would go with the e6600...when i was buying my chip i didnt even consider overclock but now my computer sits at 2.97 at stock voltage and only about 3 degress celsius rise in temperture.

edit

Air cooled too :D
 
I would go with the E6600, the extra cache really shows in encoding (audio or video) apps. And hell, who doesn't buy a PC with a DVD burner these days without the notion of backing up DVDs from Netflix (and destroying them after the rental period is over of course ;) ).
 
I'm in the same situation, deciding between 6300 & 6400. Wondering if the 6300 would be the bottleneck with a 8800GTS. Gaming rig only, dont do any video encoding.
 
E6600s generally hit around 3.5GHz, whereas E6400s usually hit about 3.3-3.4GHz and E6300s top out at around 3.2GHz unless you buy really expensive RAM. Basically, it's between the E6400 and the E6600 if you've got enough cash. I would go with the E6600.
 
The e6600 extra cache does help in performance. Just compare super PI scores you will see that a e6300 OCed to 3.7ghz will get a lower super PI score then a e6600 oced to 3.4ghz.
 
I would go with the 6600. Oh wait, I did go with the 6600! Nevermind :D

I can say this much, I'm running 200mhz under my maximum Prime95 stable speed of 3.6Ghz (400x9). I can boot up into Windows and do stuff at 3.83Ghz (425x9) but fails Prime within seconds of starting it. Only reason I don't run 3.6Ghz 24/7 now is temps get up to 70C because of the higher vcore (1.55) I need at that speed and that bugs me too much. At 3.4Ghz, I only need a tiny vcore bump to 1.375 and temps never break over 60C.
 
I run 3.33Ghz at 1.375V. I could go for more, but at this point, I'm at least 400mhz over the stock X6800 speed and I'm not putting too much juice into my chip. I couldn't do that with the E6300 I have. Is it worth the extra $150 or so? Every person has a different answer.
 
blank said:
6600 "B" chips are clocking with lower voltage than As, much lower. I think they're much more likely to hit 3.6 and that 4mb cache does make a difference
Click to expand...

How to find out what revision I'm buying (A or B)?
 
6300 needs a really good mobo that will do very high FSB.. I g0t the 6600 since its locked at a 9 multi (dont need as much FSB to hit good over clock and i could save on memory cost). I have my FSB set to 390 right now 3500g @ 1.5v on air.. Still have more room as i have had it boot up at 3.9g.
 
Just got an L632A49 from the egg. I'd like to think that means something, but I know better. :D

*rubs cpu from both sides whilst uttering ninja chants*
 
get a E6300. They're guaranteed to run 3.2Ghz. When cheaper quad cores come out, upgrade and you won't be disappointed that you bought the cheaper E6300.
 
E6400 @ 2.6ghz...not much of an overclock, but it rarely goes an extra 2 degrees warmer, usually just 1. This is on stock cooler, too...

Anybody else still using the stock cooler fine? What overclocks?
 
Jodiuh said:
Just got an L632A49 from the egg. I'd like to think that means something, but I know better. :D

*rubs cpu from both sides whilst uttering ninja chants*
Click to expand...

week 32.... plug her in & fire it up.

See if the trend continues where the chips are requiring less & less volts to hit around 3.4-3.5Ghz.
 
JackAshley said:
E6400 @ 2.6ghz...not much of an overclock, but it rarely goes an extra 2 degrees warmer, usually just 1. This is on stock cooler, too...

Anybody else still using the stock cooler fine? What overclocks?
Click to expand...

I run my E6300@2.8Ghz on the stock cooler. It heats up quite a bit under full load (70C), but it's stable.
 
chrisf6969 said:
week 32.... plug her in & fire it up.

See if the trend continues where the chips are requiring less & less volts to hit around 3.4-3.5Ghz.
Click to expand...

I'm runnin' orthos @ 3.2 right now. The Crucial does 7hr+ orthos @ 800 3.3.3.12, so I've got one bird down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top