E4300 in stock at ZZF

[EnderW]

Maybe you guys should take your geek-dick measuring contest elsewhere, this is the hot deals forum and last I checked this is called "who-gives-a-shit."

maybe you should mind your own business

 

[CyberDeus-RagDoll]

Allendale, Clovertown, Conroe, Dempsey, Merom, Woodcrest all use the Intel Core microarchitecture
All Core 2 Duo CPUs use the Intel Core microarchitecture
All Xeon 5100 CPUs use the Intel Core microarchitecture

http://www.intel.com/technology/architecture/coremicro/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_microarchitecture

Are you arguing that architecture refers to a specific combination of microarchitecture, FSB bus speed, and cache size?

I refer to that as the platform and I use the terms architecture and microarchitecture interchangably, as it seems Intel does, and I didn't find a clear distinction between the two on their site or elsewhere.

Would you try to tell me that a
Willamette Core, P4 1.3ghz, 400mhz fsb, socket 423, 256K cache, that uses rdram, has 180nm transistor, has no em64t, no sse3, no HT, no eist, no XD....

Is NOT COMPLETELY different than a P4 dual core, 3.73 ghz processor that has a 1066mhz fsb, socket 775, uses ddr or ddr2, and has a 90nm transistor size? (p4-ee-965)

Simply because they both carry the moniker "Pentium4"?


My point is that, since the e4300 is "allendale" core (call it a code name, if you want) with all those differences, it's NOT the same as the e6xxx's

By your logic, an e4300 should be considered identical to a Xeon 5150.

The "Basis" for the e4300 and the 5150, and the x6800, and the qx6700 might all be some "greater" group known as "Core"
but, they are NOT the same end resultant product.

If two buildings, one a shed, and one a 17 room mansion, are both built out of wood, does that make them the same design?
Just because a jetta has an engine, 4 doors, and 4 tires doesn't mean it's an escalade.

Actually, there's a good correlation there.
The 2003 VW jetta 1.8T and the Audi A6 1.8T.... are they they same car? They use the same engine. They have the same transmission, they both have doors, and are both owned (that would be, Volkswagen & Audi) by the larger company "Volkswagen AG"

maybe you should mind your own business

On that, I agree.

 

[EnderW]

Would you try to tell me that a
Willamette Core, P4 1.3ghz, 400mhz fsb, socket 423, 256K cache, that uses rdram, has 180nm transistor, has no em64t, no sse3, no HT, no eist, no XD....

Is NOT COMPLETELY different than a P4 dual core, 3.73 ghz processor that has a 1066mhz fsb, socket 775, uses ddr or ddr2, and has a 90nm transistor size? (p4-ee-965)

Simply because they both carry the moniker "Pentium4"?


My point is that, since the e4300 is "allendale" core (call it a code name, if you want) with all those differences, it's NOT the same as the e6xxx's

By your logic, an e4300 should be considered identical to a Xeon 5150.

all I'm talking about is the microarchitecture which is identical for both the E4300 and Xeon 5150, and is spelled out in that link to Intel's site

 

[Hiapo]

Newegg has the e4300 now for 186.

 

[Jonsey]

Newegg has the e4300 now for 186.

It will drop further in the next few weeks. They're just profiting on those who are too impaitient to wait a couple of weeks until prices settle down.

 

[Hiapo]

It will drop further in the next few weeks. They're just profiting on those who are too impaitient to wait a couple of weeks until prices settle down.

Yeah I plan on buying one, but I will wait untill the price drops.

 

[Silvermirage]

Would you try to tell me that a
Willamette Core, P4 1.3ghz, 400mhz fsb, socket 423, 256K cache, that uses rdram, has 180nm transistor, has no em64t, no sse3, no HT, no eist, no XD....

Is NOT COMPLETELY different than a P4 dual core, 3.73 ghz processor that has a 1066mhz fsb, socket 775, uses ddr or ddr2, and has a 90nm transistor size? (p4-ee-965)

Simply because they both carry the moniker "Pentium4"?

Chill. No one said that.

My point is that, since the e4300 is "allendale" core (call it a code name, if you want) with all those differences, it's NOT the same as the e6xxx's

First: Please turn your caps lock off...a minor offence here, but before you were wild!
Second: The Allendale core is the same architecture as the Conroe core. It is the same. Would you consider the old 4400+'s and 4800+'s to be different from the 4200+'s?
Third: The e6300 is an Allendale core.

By your logic, an e4300 should be considered identical to a Xeon 5150.

The "Basis" for the e4300 and the 5150, and the x6800, and the qx6700 might all be some "greater" group known as "Core"
but, they are NOT the same end resultant product.

Under my "Opinion" for the end resultant product of all are the same!
...what?

If two buildings, one a shed, and one a 17 room mansion, are both built out of wood, does that make them the same design?
Just because a jetta has an engine, 4 doors, and 4 tires doesn't mean it's an escalade.

If you have two people, one is white and the other is black, does that make them the same person? Just because their chram's are different sizes doesn't mean they are stupid.

Off topic enough? Anyone got a good deal for a VW Jetta?

Actually, there's a good correlation there.
The 2003 VW jetta 1.8T and the Audi A6 1.8T.... are they they same car? They use the same engine. They have the same transmission, they both have doors, and are both owned (that would be, Volkswagen & Audi) by the larger company "Volkswagen AG"



On that, I agree.

On that, NOT I agree.

 

[bartsimsonii]

First: Please turn your caps lock off...a minor offence here, but before you were wild!
Second: The Allendale core is the same architecture as the Conroe core. It is the same. Would you consider the old 4400+'s and 4800+'s to be different from the 4200+'s?
Third: The e6300 is an Allendale core.

IIRC the e6300 is NOT allendale. It is simply conroe with half of its L2 cache disabled.

e4300 on the other hand is allendale.

 

[CyberDeus-RagDoll]

First: Please turn your caps lock off

That's an asinine comment. Considering I am accentuating individual words (or sometimes a few words) obviously my caps lock button is not on.
My usage of caps is not that high.

"THIS IZ WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOME1 LEAVES THERE CAPS LOCK ON" (geek speek, & misspelling intentional, because caps-lock people generally can't spell, either)

This comment by you is followed by more obviously misinformed posts, and statements that even back me up!

Under my "Opinion" for the end resultant product of all are the same!...what?

a t2500, e4300, x6800, and QX-6700 are not the same. Don't you understand that point?

If you have two people, one is white and the other is black, does that make them the same person? Just because their chram's are different sizes doesn't mean they are stupid.

My point was made by you.
a Black person and a white person are still made of the "Human" architecture, but there, obviously, are differences.
BTW, dictionary.com finds no definition for "CHRAM", so, I don't know what you are talking about

Off topic enough? Anyone got a good deal for a VW Jetta?

The point was, that although the VW Jetta and the Audi A6 have some very strong similarities under the hood, they are obviously not the same vehicle.

On that, NOT I agree.

Huh?
Is that even proper english?

Second: The Allenale core is the same architecture as the Conroe core. It is the same.

Did you even bother to read what I typed, or look at the links I posted?

Third: The e6300 is an Allendale core.

No, it isn't, neither is the e6400.
Currently, the only processor in existance (as far as I know) that's allendale, is the e4300


Allendale
Allendale

For a very long time, it was considered that stripped down versions of the Conroe processors were code-named Allendale. In actuality, Allendale is a code name for a different processor. Many suggest that E6300 and E6400 are actually code-named Allendale, however, the E6300 (1.86 GHz) and E6400 (2.13 GHz) processors are not code-named Allendale because they physically have 4 MiB cache, same as their big brothers E6600 and E6700 — it is just that half of their physical memory is disabled. Traditionally, CPUs of the same family with less cache simply have the unavailable cache disabled which allows parts that fail quality control to be sold at a lower rating. The fact that E6300 and E6400 are not code-named Allendale and actually code-named Conroe has been confirmed by Intel themselves.

Quoted from The Tech Report:

You'll find plenty of sources that will tell you the code name for these 2 MiB Core 2 Duo processors is "Allendale," but Intel says otherwise. These CPUs are still code-named "Conroe," which makes sense since they're the same physical chips with half of their L2 cache disabled. Intel may well be cooking up a chip code-named Allendale with 2 MiB of L2 cache natively, but this is not that chip.[5]

The real Allendale processors, including the E4300, will be released during first quarter 2007. The real Allendale processors use a smaller mask with only 2 MiB of cache, thereby increasing the number of chips per wafer. Allendale processors are LGA775, 65 nm chips which have 800 MT/s (200 MHz × 4) FSB rather than Conroe's 1066 MT/s FSB (266 MHz × 4).

Conroe
Conroe

The first Intel Core 2 Duo processor cores, code-named Conroe and given the Intel product code 80557, were launched on July 27, 2006 at Fragapalooza. These processors are built on a 65 nm process and are intended for desktops, replacing the Pentium 4 and Pentium D. Intel has claimed that Conroe provides 40% more performance at 40% less power compared to the Pentium D. All Conroe processors are manufactured with 4 MiB L2 cache; however, for marketing purposes, the E6300 and E6400 versions have half their cache disabled, leaving them with only 2 MiB of usable L2 cache.

The lower end E6300 (1.86 GHz) and E6400 (2.13 GHz), both with a 1066 MT/s FSB, were released on July 27, 2006. Traditionally, CPUs of the same family with less cache simply have the unavailable cache disabled, since this allows parts that fail quality control to be sold at a lower rating. At launch time, Intel's prices for the Core 2 Duo E6300 and E6400 processors were US$183 and US$224 each in quantities of 1000. Conroe CPUs have an enormous value with their overclocking capabilities — the 1.86 GHz model has been shown to overclock to over 3.0 GHz with a good motherboard supporting high FSB speeds. In these reports, an overclocked Core 2 Duo 1.86 GHz was shown to eclipse the Core 2 Extreme in certain benchmarks. According to well respected reviews, the E6300 and E6400 only suffers on average 3.5% because of the smaller L2 cache size. With the higher overclock of the two processors, enthusiasts can easily make up the 3.5% percent by overclocking further than its higher end Conroe cousins. However, the low multiplier on these two lower-end chips requires a very high FSB to reach high speeds, which few motherboards support.

The higher end Conroe processors are labeled as the E6600 and E6700 Core 2 Duo models, with the E6600 clocked at 2.4 GHz and the E6700 clocked at 2.67 GHz. The family has a 1066 MT/s front side bus, 4 MiB shared L2 cache, and 65 watts TDP. These processors have been tested against AMD's current top performing processors (Athlon 64 FX Series), which were, until this latest Intel release, the fastest CPUs available, and the vanilla Conroe boasts much faster performance.[1] Overclocking results show that the E6700 and E6600 are stable when overclocked to 4 GHz with air cooling and to 5.4 GHz with liquid nitrogen cooling, despite having locked multipliers.[2]

At launch time, Intel's prices for the Core 2 Duo E6600 and E6700 processors were US$316 and US$530 each in quantities of 1000.

IIRC the e6300 is NOT allendale. It is simply conroe with half of its L2 cache disabled.

e4300 on the other hand is allendale.

You are CORRECT

 

[MC FLMJIG]

e4300 on the other hand is allendale.
Yup