Get E6400 or stick with what I got?``

C

cslogical

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 22, 2005
Messages
298
I am looking to get the E6400 but it is a good enough boost over my AMD X2 4200 for gaming? Of cource I need a new mobo/ram also.
 
cslogical said:
I am looking to get the E6400 but it is a good enough boost over my AMD X2 4200 for gaming? Of cource I need a new mobo/ram also.
Click to expand...

1. What are the rest of the system specs currently?
2. What games are typically played on the system?
3. How much of an issue is cash?
4. How soon would the upgrade happen? You should consider waiting about a month for the prices to drop and also for some better motherboard options to emerge.
 
biggles said:
1. What are the rest of the system specs currently?
2. What games are typically played on the system?
3. How much of an issue is cash?
4. How soon would the upgrade happen? You should consider waiting about a month for the prices to drop and also for some better motherboard options to emerge.
Click to expand...
ATI X1900XT, 74gb Raptor, 2gb ram, Audigy 2ZS
Mainly play fps (CS:S, Quake 4)
Cash isn't too big of an issue but I could save if the performance isn't really noticable
Looking to upgrade before winter
 
cslogical said:
ATI X1900XT, 74gb Raptor, 2gb ram, Audigy 2ZS
Mainly play fps (CS:S, Quake 4)
Cash isn't too big of an issue but I could save if the performance isn't really noticable
Looking to upgrade before winter
Click to expand...

keep what you have. youll be wasting money doing otherwise.
 
cslogical said:
ATI X1900XT, 74gb Raptor, 2gb ram, Audigy 2ZS
Mainly play fps (CS:S, Quake 4)
Cash isn't too big of an issue but I could save if the performance isn't really noticable
Looking to upgrade before winter
Click to expand...

In this case the e6400 would not be enough of a performance jump. Go with an e6600 instead. The prices will be reasonable by winter and so will the motherboard selection. The e6600 is the biggest "bang for the buck" of core 2 duos based on the fact that it's the cheapest one with 4 mb of cache and overclocks better than all of the others.
 
biggles said:
In this case the e6400 would not be enough of a performance jump. Go with an e6600 instead. The prices will be reasonable by winter and so will the motherboard selection. The e6600 is the biggest "bang for the buck" of core 2 duos based on the fact that it's the cheapest one with 4 mb of cache and overclocks better than all of the others.
Click to expand...
Neither of them will give him a noticeable boost and are a complete waste of his money.
 
lithium726 said:
Neither of them will give him a noticeable boost and are a complete waste of his money.
Click to expand...

indeed. I mean its CS:S and Quake 4 for christs sake, and he already has an X1900XT. Are these people insane?
 
Tutelary said:
indeed. I mean its CS:S and Quake 4 for christs sake, and he already has an X1900XT. Are these people insane?
Click to expand...
If you take the OP's postings literally, the guy doesn't need any upgrades. Let's get that point out of the way first off.

However, let us assume other uses in the near future besides CS:S and Quake 4, such as video encoding or other FPS gaming that would benefit from a faster cpu (e.g., Quake Wars or Fear multiplayer). Looking at gaming benchmarks it would appear the current system's framerates are sufficient. That's because most benches do not show the minimum framerate, only the average. And the conroe cpus will do a lot better on minimum framerate in online first person shooter matches. When there is a ton of onscreen action, that is the worst time for the framerate to take a nosedive and of course that is when it always happens. With a faster conroe cpu it would happen less often.
 
biggles said:
If you take the OP's postings literally, the guy doesn't need any upgrades. Let's get that point out of the way first off.

However, let us assume other uses in the near future besides CS:S and Quake 4, such as video encoding or other FPS gaming that would benefit from a faster cpu (e.g., Quake Wars or Fear multiplayer). Looking at gaming benchmarks it would appear the current system's framerates are sufficient. That's because most benches do not show the minimum framerate, only the average. And the conroe cpus will do a lot better on minimum framerate in online first person shooter matches. When there is a ton of onscreen action, that is the worst time for the framerate to take a nosedive and of course that is when it always happens. With a faster conroe cpu it would happen less often.
Click to expand...

oh please. Thats a damn minimalistic upgrade. You cannot sit and rationalize it to me. I played quake 1 alone for over 5 years, not to mention everything else. I dont need an fps primer. Telling this guy to get a 6400 is a dis-service to him.
 
cslogical said:
I am looking to get the E6400 but it is a good enough boost over my AMD X2 4200 for gaming? Of cource I need a new mobo/ram also.
Click to expand...

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2802

Anand said:
The E6400 finds itself in between the X2 4200+ and X2 4600+ in price, but in performance the E6400 generally lands in between the 4600+ and 5000+. Once again, with these 2MB parts the performance advantage isn't nearly as impressive as with the 4MB parts (partly due to the fact that their native clock speed is lower, in addition to the smaller L2 cache), but even with AMD's new price cuts the Core 2 is still very competitive at worst. If you're not opposed to overclocking, then the E6400 can offer you more than you can get from any currently shipping AMD CPU - our chip managed an effortless 2.88GHz overclock which gave us $1000 CPU performance for $224.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with the "It's not worth it" or "It makes no difference" folks. Anandtech the site or its reviewers aren't known as being Intel friendly. Examples;

If it weren't for AMD, we wouldn't have Core 2, and if it weren't for Core 2 then we wouldn't have affordable Athlon 64 X2s.
The processor landscape has been changed once more thanks to AMD's extremely aggressive price cuts.

Shouldn't that be thanks to Intel? If Intel had nothing to force AMD's hand, there'd be nothing to thank AMD for LOL!

I do agree with the guys saying wait for better motherboards though, most current i975 and i965Ps suck, are overpriced and have tons of room for improvement. AMD fans should be all over that issue. Trying to say there's no or little difference is way off here. I can't wait to see what mine can do once my RAM gets here! I had to RMA the GSKill-ZX.
I'm current running in limp mode with only 256MB of DDR2 533.
 
well, I think that review was attempting to imply that if you had to chose between one of the two when buying a new computer, it was directing which to chose. That doesn't mean that having one means you should switch to the other, or that the benefit of one over the other is great enough for the value of switching.
 
Tutelary said:
oh please. Thats a damn minimalistic upgrade. You cannot sit and rationalize it to me. I played quake 1 alone for over 5 years, not to mention everything else. I dont need an fps primer. Telling this guy to get a 6400 is a dis-service to him.
Click to expand...

The following article is a good illustration of how conroes do a better job with minimum frame rates in gaming:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1996932,00.asp
Note this article compares Athlon 5000+ with e6600 and the OP has a 4200+ cpu. So the improvement would be larger than this article implies. And I agree that the OP should not upgrade to an e6400 because the improvement would not be large enough. OP should at least go for an e6600 to make the upgrade worthwhile.
 
kaddar said:
well, I think that review was attempting to imply that if you had to chose between one of the two when buying a new computer, it was directing which to chose. That doesn't mean that having one means you should switch to the other, or that the benefit of one over the other is great enough for the value of switching.
Click to expand...

The performance difference can be noticed. It doesn't mean 4200+ would be blown away and or that it sucks, it doesn't!

I posted the Anantech viewpoint to show a performance difference is there as Anand pointed out. I linked to the other stuff to show there is still some bias FOR AMD at Anand's site as his own words show.

Oh and Opteron 165 isn't that cute anymore LOL!
 
biggles said:
The following article is a good illustration of how conroes do a better job with minimum frame rates in gaming:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1996932,00.asp
Note this article compares Athlon 5000+ with e6600 and the OP has a 4200+ cpu. So the improvement would be larger than this article implies. And I agree that the OP should not upgrade to an e6400 because the improvement would not be large enough. OP should at least go for an e6600 to make the upgrade worthwhile.
Click to expand...
I'll probably just wait since the e6600's are hard to come by for now.
 
Yea, no way is it worth upgrading now for what you got and what you do. Not with things like the K8L and Kentsfield on their way and DX10 cards all probably within a year.

Once all that is out, Vista, and Crysis you will have a REAL reason to upgrade. Though I have a feeling thats going to be a REALLY expensive upgrade.
 
Tutelary said:
indeed. I mean its CS:S and Quake 4 for christs sake, and he already has an X1900XT. Are these people insane?
Click to expand...
QFT
What's the difference 90 FPS or 110 FPS
You can't tell the difference above 60 or 70 or w/e anyway. Also, if you really want to get Higher FPS, upgrade to Cross Fire or SLI
 
How come I'm a troll when it comes to this thread http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1087712 , but everyone here agrees that an e6300 is a nill upgrade from an x2 4200. I mean, this guy was insane for considering an opteron clock at 2.9ghz to an e6300 an upgrade. Maybe the conroe fanbo1s avoid threads that prove the conroe is an e-penis upgrade for most of us?
 
TheWikipediaPwnzJ00 said:
How come I'm a troll when it comes to this thread http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1087712 , but everyone here agrees that an e6300 is a nill upgrade from an x2 4200. I mean, this guy was insane for considering an opteron clock at 2.9ghz to an e6300 an upgrade. Maybe the conroe fanbo1s avoid threads that prove the conroe is an e-penis upgrade for most of us?
Click to expand...
It was the way you approached the situation. It was also the fact that the guy was just looking to have some fun and didnt really care about the performance difference. Stupid, yes, but hey, its his money.
 
OMG I HAVE A CELERON D 326 SHOULD I BE UPGRADING WHAT TYPE OF BOOST WILL I SEE KTHXBAI.

Go look up numbers for yourself and see if that type of boost is worth the money to you. To me, it is. To someone else, it won't be worth it. Ask for facts, then choose for yourself :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top