• 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.

E6300 v E6600 @ Stock

J

Jon855

[H]ard DCOTM January 2008
2FA
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Messages
12,132
Like the title states, I 'm wondering the PPD differences in a E6300 v E6600 if I don't overclock it at all and run Linux SMP on it on a Linux OS. What's your esitmate? I'm trying to figure out how to save more money for the points I can obtain.

I'm working on a new build and I need to check which one is better, of course the faster one is but it's nearly twice the price and yet I want to see if the points differences really are worth it. And then there's the overclocking comparison. Some E6600 have been able to hit 4Ghz mark and some 3.8Ghz mark and so on forth, E6300 has been hitting 2.8-3.2Ghz mark.

Please compare them for me and I'm relative new to them CPUs. :) Thanks and yes this is part of my grand scheme to find cures...
 
Couldn't tell you between the two, but I would imagine linear. Scaling between my 2.66GHz (e6400@333FSB) desktop and 1.66GHz (T5500@stock) was almost directly proportional- desktop pulled around 1.8-2K PPD, laptop pulled around 1200.
 
Your E6300 at 2.66ghz pulled almost 2000 PPD ... I'm having a hard time believing that.

Once instance of my Q6600 @ 3.5ghz in VMware only does ~1700 PPD.

I'm having a hard time believing your numbers. Proof?
 
DriveEuro said:
Your E6300 at 2.66ghz pulled almost 2000 PPD ... I'm having a hard time believing that.

Once instance of my Q6600 @ 3.5ghz in VMware only does ~1700 PPD.

I'm having a hard time believing your numbers. Proof?
Click to expand...
Simple- don't run VMWare. :p (Not to nitpick, but e6400.)

1760-pointer in around 22 hours. (24/22)*1760=1920.

If you check the old thread on the VMWare image, you'll see that I had a lot of trouble getting it to run stable. I ended up throwing a Ubuntu CD in and booting off of that, true Linux instead of virtualized Linux.
 
DriveEuro said:
Your E6300 at 2.66ghz pulled almost 2000 PPD ... I'm having a hard time believing that.

Once instance of my Q6600 @ 3.5ghz in VMware only does ~1700 PPD.

I'm having a hard time believing your numbers. Proof?
Click to expand...

I got between 1518 PPD on P3025 (587 point wu) and 2144 PPD on P2605 (1760 point wu)my C2D @ 3.33 running a VMware/Suse/LinuxSMP setup.
 
Jon855 said:
Like the title states, I 'm wondering the PPD differences in a E6300 v E6600 if I don't overclock it at all and run Linux SMP on it on a Linux OS. What's your esitmate? I'm trying to figure out how to save more money for the points I can obtain.
Click to expand...

Guesstimate: E6300 about 1000 PPD average across the board @ stock and the E6600 about 1300 PPD average across the board @ stock. The extra cache of the E6600 really does help out on some of the beefier WUs like the P2610 on the WinSMP client. If the price roadmaps are correct, I would go for the E6600 in about 2 weeks.
 
Killer[MoB];1030925701 said:
Guesstimate: E6300 about 1000 PPD average across the board @ stock and the E6600 about 1300 PPD average across the board @ stock. The extra cache of the E6600 really does help out on some of the beefier WUs like the P2610 on the WinSMP client. If the price roadmaps are correct, I would go for the E6600 in about 2 weeks.
Click to expand...
Too low on both counts. Check my laptop numbers above.
T5500 @ 1.66GHz = 1.2K/D
e6300 @ 1.86GHz = 1.35K/D from linear clock speed increase
e6600 @ 2.66GHz will probably be close to my 1.8-2K, maybe lower because of the 266-vs-333 FSB.

Just make sure you're running the Linux SMP client.
 
Reason why I'm asking about the CPUs are because I'll be having some credit line and loan of some amount, I'll be able to build another computer off that and I want the bang for the buck. It also would be used by me as a main rig as well. I'm just looking around for the best suggestion on them CPUs in terms of Perf v. Prices.

I'll look around, thanks to these who have inputted.
 
I wouldn't say he's lying, running the true Linux is a lot faster than the Win SMP version. How are you guys finding the PPD? Taking time per step X the # of steps or using a program? I am using F@H Spy and it does not tell me PPD for SMP Clients, but it will for console versions. According to F@H Spy, My e6600 Win SMP is doing the 2610 in 14:40 to 15:39 mins. I have it clocked @ 2.6 which seems about right when you look @ the spreadsheet Killer has.
http://members.cox.net/foldinginfo/smp2.htm
As Killer stated, the extra cache helps the e6600 on the 2610's for sure. Next time the machine get's one I will document the frame times. I also agree w/Killer about getting the 6600 once the price cuts come. I run so much on that 6600 box and it still does EVERYTHING fast, it's like you don't even notice the SMP running other than it's on the taskbar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top