C2D E6750 vs Pentium E5400

RoGuE1230

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 25, 2006
Messages
464
Hi, I was given a used Dell Optiplex 380 business computer (had viruses and couldn't be bothered to remove them) recently. It has a Pentium E5400 in it. I also have a C2D E6750 lying around in a computer with a bad motherboard. Would it be worth my time to swap the C2D in? They have roughly the same clock speed, but the C2D has a higher FSB speed, double the L2 cache, but is also 65nm vs the Pentium's 45nm. I guess my main question is, would there be a significant heat increase with the 65nm C2D, and if so does it outweigh the other benefits?

I assume the motherboard would be fine running it, unless it is locked down by Dell. This seems to be the motherboard:
http://www.memory4less.com/m4l_itemdetail.aspx?itemid=1463781546

These are the two processors:
http://ark.intel.com/products/40478/Intel-Pentium-Processor-E5400-(2M-Cache-2_70-GHz-800-MHz-FSB)

http://ark.intel.com/products/30784/Intel-Core2-Duo-Processor-E6750-4M-Cache-2_66-GHz-1333-MHz-FSB
 
Anandtech's bench of the E6750 vs the E5300 (just a hair slower than a 5400) shows both chips just about dead even in most performance aspects.

However! An interesting inflection point in the numbers should be noted in Sysmark 2007 Productivity, Winrar compression, Excel 2007 Monte Carlo simulation, and even gaming where the 6750 is markedly quicker than the 5400. In other words, the 6750 definitely has better compute ability than the 5400. So, if you plan on using the Optiplex 380 for any sort of content creation / productivity / gaming it may actually be worth it. Anything else, i really wouldn't bother.
 
Anandtech's bench of the E6750 vs the E5300 (just a hair slower than a 5400) shows both chips just about dead even in most performance aspects.

However! An interesting inflection point in the numbers should be noted in Sysmark 2007 Productivity, Winrar compression, Excel 2007 Monte Carlo simulation, and even gaming where the 6750 is markedly quicker than the 5400's. In other words, the 6750 definitely has better compute ability than the 5400. So, if you plan on using the Optiplex 380 for any sort of content creation / productivity / gaming it may actually be worth it. Anything else, i really wouldn't bother.

No gaming or anything like that. My dad is using it just for web browsing and Netflix usage.

Unfortunately I don't think the Radeon HD3400 is well suited for HD content, and the 32 bit Windows 7 limiting the RAM isn't helping either, but that's a question for a different subforum, lol.
 
That board does have a single PCI-E slot. You may be able to throw in a real cheap card like an HD5450 or something for the Netflix stuff. I woudn't bother messing with the CPU.
 
That board does have a single PCI-E slot. You may be able to throw in a real cheap card like an HD5450 or something for the Netflix stuff. I woudn't bother messing with the CPU.

Okay, thanks for the help. I agree it isn't worth it for such similar performance. The PCI-E slot is occupied by the HD3400 already. I also have an HD5450 lying around too, but it has a full size pci slot bracket. The half height bracket on the 3400 won't work on the 5450 either.

Rather than start another thread, perhaps I could pose a similar question.

I also have a HP DC7700p, which has a C2D E6300 (http://ark.intel.com/products/27248/Intel-Core2-Duo-Processor-E6300-2M-Cache-1_86-GHz-1066-MHz-FSB). Comparing it to the E6750 I have, it seems to have the same 65nm die and voltage range. Would there be any problems upgrading the processor?
 
That's a tough one.

The manual states:
* #E6300, 2 MB cache, 1.86 GHz, 1066 FSB 418947-001
* #E6400, 2 MB cache, 2.13 GHz, 1066 FSB 418948-001
* #E6600, 4 MB cache, 2.4 GHz, 1066 FSB 418949-001
* #E6700, 4 MB cache, 2.67 GHz, 1066 FSB 418950-001

...but not the 6750. I would like to think it should work, but that is the 3rd revision manual (and latest) for that box so i am not sure. However, the 6300 is still very comparable to the 6750 in the benchmarks so i woudn't bother upgrading that one either.
 
That's a tough one.

The manual states:
* #E6300, 2 MB cache, 1.86 GHz, 1066 FSB 418947-001
* #E6400, 2 MB cache, 2.13 GHz, 1066 FSB 418948-001
* #E6600, 4 MB cache, 2.4 GHz, 1066 FSB 418949-001
* #E6700, 4 MB cache, 2.67 GHz, 1066 FSB 418950-001

...but not the 6750. I would like to think it should work, but that is the 3rd revision manual (and latest) for that box so i am not sure. However, the 6300 is still very comparable to the 6750 in the benchmarks so i woudn't bother upgrading that one either.

Thanks for all the help so far. I know very little about Intel CPUs, I've always purchased AMDs, and even then I go many years before upgrading.

I notice all of those you listed have a 1066 FSB, and the 6750 has a 1333 FSB listed. I assume it can't hurt anything if I put the CPU in and it doesn't work?

Also, that comparison you linked to is for the Pentium E6300 compared to the C2D E6750, they are both C2D in this case. (C2D E6300 1.86 GHz vs C2D E6750 2.66GHz)
 
The board in that HP DC7700P uses a Q965 Express chipset which only supports the 1066mhz FSB Intel chips. The 6750 is a 1333mhz FSB chip so i don't think it'll work.
 
Last edited:
Forgot to update this. I figured it couldn't hurt to try and it was probably good to replace the thermal paste anyway. I swapped the processor and power it on, and sure enough the thing beeps and flashes a red light 9 times. Swapped the old one back in and all is well again. Thanks for all the help everyone.
 
Back
Top