![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
e6400 vs. e6300 and e6320 all under $200
- Thread starter Glow
- Start date
Retsam
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2005
- Messages
- 3,905
Yeah I am in same boat deciding. Waiting till Monday i think to make a decision.
By the way, the E6420 is under $200 as well.
Mwave has the E4300 for $117 bud so, might look into that. They also have the E6320 for $169 and the E6420 for $189.
By the way, the E6420 is under $200 as well.
Mwave has the E4300 for $117 bud so, might look into that. They also have the E6320 for $169 and the E6420 for $189.
Yeah I am in same boat deciding. Waiting till Monday i think to make a decision.
By the way, the E6420 is under $200 as well.
Mwave has the E4300 for $117 bud so, might look into that. They also have the E6320 for $169 and the E6420 for $189.
yeah lot of hard decisions how do the 6320s and new 4mb chips OC?
Retsam
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2005
- Messages
- 3,905
From what ive seen so far, all the new 4mb cache chips OC like champs. Definitely a better pick over their 2mb counterparts
whats the 6320s multi and 6400 etc etc?
Retsam
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2005
- Messages
- 3,905
E6320/6300 are the same man. Both are 7x. E6400/6420 is 8x.
I know, I love the E6300 price but that damn 7x multiplier.....
I know, I love the E6300 price but that damn 7x multiplier.....
I dont get it everyone seemed to have some great results? how much more does the 6400s get compared?
Retsam
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2005
- Messages
- 3,905
What do you mean? Great results ocing the E6300/6320?
It is not about the cpu man. What you are missing is, ocing a cpu with a low multiplier very high puts a lot of stress on the motherboard and on the memory. If you have noticed some people talking about their motherboards dying? That is part of it. If you look at some of those people who have said their mobos died, alot of them had the E6300 and were running like 3.6+ghz
The CPU will overclock fine, its having to worry about the mobo temps and memory. A little less to worry about with 8x multiplier. Or E6600 which has 9x. Or the E4xx series which start at 9x.
It is not about the cpu man. What you are missing is, ocing a cpu with a low multiplier very high puts a lot of stress on the motherboard and on the memory. If you have noticed some people talking about their motherboards dying? That is part of it. If you look at some of those people who have said their mobos died, alot of them had the E6300 and were running like 3.6+ghz
The CPU will overclock fine, its having to worry about the mobo temps and memory. A little less to worry about with 8x multiplier. Or E6600 which has 9x. Or the E4xx series which start at 9x.
A higher multi helps if you are getting average board and rams... you can say it is 'easier' to OC. And, it doesn't matter what chip you get, once you hit colse to 3.8 ghz, you will be worrying about the heat. For example, with my set up, I am 'Tuniq' limited, as in, I borrowed my buds E6600 and was limited by the heat to about as high as I can get my E6300.
So what you're saying is it would be better to get a E6420 or better yet a E6600?
I have both a E6600 and a E6420 and I have had better luck with the E6420, but I didn't know that much about the mobo and memory stress deal (makes sense to me) Seeing the price cuts haven't panned out yet, it would probably be a better idea for me to shoot for another E6600 rather than another E6420 (is that a good plan?, I read where the price difference was going to be about $60 US dollars ?) Man, I wish I could afford a quad right now.Edit: I already had a MSI board blow out on my X2 4200+, I sure don't need anymore boards going tits up
I don't really OC' that extreme (I'm folding 24/7), my E6600 is only 2.9 GHz. I got my E6420 up to 3.0 GHz (but I don't want to stress the P4B Dlx board it's in , the E6600 is in a AW9D-MAX mobo)
Retsam
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2005
- Messages
- 3,905
Yeah. Now keep in mind, this is all relative and related to high overclocking speeds. IF you DONT plan on ocing past like 3.0ghz, I wouldnt worry as much and a E6300 is fine.
Im saying, you have to worry less about cooling/FSB speeds on the motherboard and ocing capabilities of the memory, if you choose a higher multiplier CPU such as an E6420 or E6600.
If you pick a E6300, it has the lowest multi out of all C2D chips at 7x. You now have to worry about the FSB speeds and cooling on the motherboard a bit more(Some mobos max out at 450ish FSB which can also prevent you from ocing the cpu higher.) As well as memory capabilities.
Dont get me wrong, a E6300 is a great cpu, and I am actually considering getting one(Not sure yet), but id say they are more for people who want a mild overclock and dont need 3.4+ghz I will most likely only need 3ghz or so, so I may go with the cheapest solution. Im still debating heh.
Im saying, you have to worry less about cooling/FSB speeds on the motherboard and ocing capabilities of the memory, if you choose a higher multiplier CPU such as an E6420 or E6600.
If you pick a E6300, it has the lowest multi out of all C2D chips at 7x. You now have to worry about the FSB speeds and cooling on the motherboard a bit more(Some mobos max out at 450ish FSB which can also prevent you from ocing the cpu higher.) As well as memory capabilities.
Dont get me wrong, a E6300 is a great cpu, and I am actually considering getting one(Not sure yet), but id say they are more for people who want a mild overclock and dont need 3.4+ghz
I will most likely only need 3ghz or so, so I may go with the cheapest solution. Im still debating heh.Yeah. Now keep in mind, this is all relative and related to high overclocking speeds. IF you DONT plan on ocing past like 3.0ghz, I wouldnt worry as much and a E6300 is fine.
Im saying, you have to worry less about cooling/FSB speeds on the motherboard and ocing capabilities of the memory, if you choose a higher multiplier CPU such as an E6420 or E6600.
If you pick a E6300, it has the lowest multi out of all C2D chips at 7x. You now have to worry about the FSB speeds and cooling on the motherboard a bit more(Some mobos max out at 450ish FSB which can also prevent you from ocing the cpu higher.) As well as memory capabilities.
Dont get me wrong, a E6300 is a great cpu, and I am actually considering getting one(Not sure yet), but id say they are more for people who want a mild overclock and dont need 3.4+ghz
Phew.. I don't usually OC' much more tha 3.0 GHz, I try to fold 24/7 and I don't need the hassle of a temperamental OC'. Besides they tell me the Linux SMP client puts more of a strain on the cpu then Orthos
If I was going to fold 24/7, I'd get the highest multiplier I could afford. Motherboards, cpus, memory, etc. is not really designed to "live forever" when it's being run loaded 100% 24/7, so the less stress, the better (ie. lower FSB)... and actually, the E4300 makes a great choice for that, for an inexpensive chip with a 9x multiplier.
Okay, I was able to figure out the multiplier for all the C2D CPUs. The 4400 has a 10, good for people with less than average memory. So, that means it will work well with my PC6400 memory (PC3200x2 or quad*200) which is the FSB of this CPU. So, I know that in order to use a FSB higher than my memory is capable, we use divider, does it reduce my system's performance if I use a divider (meaning not running 1:1)?
burningrave101
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2003
- Messages
- 11,825
No. The only real impact you'll notice from running a divider is slower memory clocks and high bandwidth usually isn't all that important in most situations with the C2D processors since they aren't bandwidth starved. Faster memory speeds will improve your overall performance by small percentages. Most notably in benchmarks.
So.. you're suggesting that running with a 500FSB is the best option, when you plan to have the CPU under a constant 24/7 load?
Ever hear of the terms 'duty-cycle' or MTBF (mean-time-before-failure) ? .EDIT: Sorry, it wasn't the OP that was planning to fold 24/7... so my original comments were directed at jws2346.
So.. you're suggesting that running with a 500FSB is the best option, when you plan to have the CPU under a constant 24/7 load?
EDIT: Sorry, it wasn't the OP that was planning to fold 24/7... so my original comments were directed at jws2346.
ok nub, why dont you go here and help me some?
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1184900
Sorry, it was not meant as a snide remark... if you look at my first comment in this thread, I was directing that comment/answer to your comment/question/statement just above there - that's all I meant by that.
My suggestion - in that first post - was that if you intend to do folding 24/7, then the best option would probably be to get a cpu with a high clock multiplier, so you can get a reasonably high CPU speed (with a lower FSB) without having to feed high voltages to the CPU.
Not long after that, LawGiver posts that the E6320 would be the best option, running at FSB 500x7. I thought he was recommending that setup for running a loaded system 24/7 (which didn't make a lot of sense), so I responded as I did, in my second post in this thread. I then realized that he wasn't (necessarily) responding to you or me, but to the OP, so I added my edit.
I fold 24/7 on this machine and it runs just fine. As long as it lasts about two years then I'll be happy...but it will probably run much longer than that. I've never had a machine crash due to folding or any other distributed computing project either.