Conroe Heatsink, Wolfdale CPU

[Jerec]

I'm looking to upgrade an older computer's CPU, which I suspect is hindering gameplay performance because some modern games run rather slowly despite there being a Radeon 6850 in there.

I'd be going from a Core 2 E6420 (2.1 GHz) to a Core 2 E8400 (3 GHz).

I've built this computer as well as my own, which has its own E8400. I did notice that the heatsink did change between the Conroe and Wolfdale generations. The Conroe heatsink appears larger and has a copper core, while the Wolfdale one is smaller and is all aluminum.

The E8400 I'm ordering likely won't have a heatsink included. I'm guessing it won't matter reusing the Conroe heatsink, but I'd like to consult the expertise of this community before I proceed.

Thanks!

 

[unclewebb]

The original Conroe heatsink with the copper core is a better heatsink than the cheaper and smaller heatsink that Intel shipped with the newer 45nm Core 2 CPUs. They are interchangeable so use the Conroe heatsink.

 

[Jerec]

Thanks for confirming my thoughts!

 

[ziggo0]

If you are looking for better performance on a rig like that for modern games you will benefit more from a quad core than another dual core. My q9550 // 6870 1gb still plays all of today's games with either max settings or just under with FSAA (or FXAA) no problem...very playable FPS, I actually 'downgraded' from my i3 to this q9550 that I had sitting around because of the lack of 4 cores that modern games use up so well.

 

[PGHammer]

If you are looking for better performance on a rig like that for modern games you will benefit more from a quad core than another dual core. My q9550 // 6870 1gb still plays all of today's games with either max settings or just under with FSAA (or FXAA) no problem...very playable FPS, I actually 'downgraded' from my i3 to this q9550 that I had sitting around because of the lack of 4 cores that modern games use up so well.

All too true.

Remember, I was the guy that went from cut-down Wolfdale (E3400) to full-tilt Kentsfield (Q6600) on the CSM stumblebum that is G41 (no overclocking *and* a 4GB DDR2 capacity) - changing nothing else. Yet performance in everything doubled or nearly doubled - if the application or game used more than two cores (such as WinRAR, 7-Zip, or Supreme Commander), it MORE than doubled.

Food for thought - even if you run exactly NO software that supports using more than two cores, Windows itself (x64 versions of XP and later) is multicore-aware by design due to it being based on the *server* flavors of Windows code-wise; that is, in fact, one reason I won't run an x32 flavor of Windows bare-metal on a multicore CPU if at all possible - too INefficient. (It's not unique to Intel CPUs - the same applies to AMD CPUs as well.) If you're only changing bitness (x32->x64), your same product key is re-usable (7 HP x32-> 7 HP x64, for example).

 

[/dev/null]

I don't ebay much but you can get Q6600's for $50-$60 + shipping.

I'd go that way over e8400.

I just replaced an E8400 with a xen 33300 (aka q9400).

Much better for vm's and almost as fast.

 

[PGHammer]

I don't ebay much but you can get Q6600's for $50-$60 + shipping.

I'd go that way over e8400.

I just replaced an E8400 with a xen 33300 (aka q9400).

Much better for vm's and almost as fast.

Again, it depends on the application.

Virtualization (regardless of platform) is decidedly multicore-aware - other than encoding or compression/decompression software/encryption software, it's the MOST likely *average Joe/Jane* use for a multicore CPU. With my Q6600, it's virtualization - not gaming - that's the real CPU-stressor.

 

[PGHammer]

The original Conroe heatsink with the copper core is a better heatsink than the cheaper and smaller heatsink that Intel shipped with the newer 45nm Core 2 CPUs. They are interchangeable so use the Conroe heatsink.

There are exceptions to this *rule*.

For instance, I replaced a dual-core Conroe Celeron DC E1200 with a Wolfdale Celeron DC E3400 (this was before the Q6600 replaced the latter). The E1200 had a three-wire fan motor (the same one that was, in fact, standard fare with E6xxx) - however, the E3400 included a 4-wire fan motor and the *heavy* HSF that launched simultaneously with Kentsfield (Q6600) and was carried over to both Yorkfield and Wolfdale. There is, in fact, no difference whatever between the E3400 HSF and the Q6600 HSF - despite the massive differences in packaging.