Performace difference between e6400 and e6600 big?

[dave343]

I bought a e6400 but before I go ahead and open it I"m wondering if the extra $100 is worth it to spend on the e6600. Is the extra 2mb cache and 300mhz going to make much of a difference in any games? R6 Vegas and the upcoming Crysis/Alan Wake? I paid 275 for the e6400 and the e6600 would cost me 379. I don't plan on overclocking at all.

Other specs.

Asus P5NSLI
2x 7800GTX 256mb cards SLI
2GB OCZ Plat XTC DDR2-800
WD 80gb Sata
Enermax 435w PSU.

 

[BillParrish]

No, and it would really be a shame to not overclock either one you decide on. You dont have to go the the edge like some of us, with the stock cooler you can easily get that to the 2.4 GHz range without increasing the heat or decreasing the life with normal voltage settings.

you have the memory for it, with a decent heatsink I bet you could just set your FSB to 400MHz and reboot for a sweet 3.2 GHz, but its your stuff and you do what you think best

 

[dave343]

Well I have roughly $120 I can put into my system more and there are 2 places I can spend it. Either use it for the e6600 or get a nice case like an Antec P108B. Right now I'm using a generic regular case which does the job but with the SLI I'm worried heat might be an issue. Then again the e6600 looks good too.

 

[~LoKe]

I'd invest in a nicer case (better airflow, easier to work on, aesthetics, etc) rather than a higher-end processor which is almost useless for most.

 

[BillParrish]

I am with ~LoKe go with the case + extra fan if not equipped and any left over to the video cards, or power supply For gaming you will not be able to tell the difference between the processors and with no effort the 6400 can be set up to outrun the 6600 at stock settings. Its like free money.

 

[BillParrish]

Here ya go read this, and note carefully the different speeds that they look at.

I linked a performance comparison with a popular game but think you should read the whole thing. I want to get you to OC that thing, even just a little, if I can. Note that my E6300 at it current (on the edge ) stable 7x24 settings would wipe the floor with anything on that chart, If I had the same video card.


http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2802&p=10

 

[dave343]

Games now are GPU hungry but what about when games like Alan Wake come out that have multiple threads for Audio and Physics? Those will be the times a e6600 might come in handy no? As for overclocking I might in the future but honestly I do IT for a living and when I come home I just want my working machine, I want to build it and leave it. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying a tweaking machine won't work but just when I put it together I just want to leave it, load windows on, load up R6 and let the stress from the day go.

 

[Tripp17]

I am going to have to disagree with the others, i think the e6600 is the best bet. I mean i saw some bench marks in games where a 3.5 e6400 was about the equivilant of a X6800 at stock speeds. Some games its not so bad but from what ive seen, you need to overclock the 2mb conroes a few hundred megahertz past the 4mb conroes to match performance. So if you wanted the performance of a e6700(2.66), youd need to clock you e6400 to about 2.9 or so. I will say however that once you get up there i suppose it doesnt make that much difference. For me i need the highest possable fps i can get because i Vsync all my games to my monitors refresh rate because it provides the smoothest game play available and my monitors refresh rate is at 85. So my fps can never dip below that. So i bought a e6600 and i have it at 3.6. It depends on what ya like. Some people dont mind as long as there frames are abouve 30. To me that sucks so bad, but its taste really.