Which chip should I go with?

[Hulk]

I'm going to be gaming mostly, RTS, FPS, etc.

 

[Sojuuk]

if you wanna go dirt cheap get the e7300, or if you want cheap but good overclocking get the e8400 HOWEVER the e8500 is not much more for slightly better overclocking. overclock all of them to 3.6-4.0ghz, the e7*** wont really get past 4.0ghz all e8*** will i believe.

i voted e8500 cause it's the best price/performance IMO.

 

[alg7_munif]

Q6600?

 

[Hulk]

Q6600?

sorry, looking for dual core only

 

[SharpieFiend]

E5200 then... Super-cheap, overclocks in the 3.5 - 4Ghz range and can be replaced with a quad later if you want and not leave a huge dent in your pocketbook.

 

[xdivenx]

I personally recommend getting an E8400. I don't think the price premium is worth it over getting an E8500 or E8600.

 

[GonzoP]

You really can make a case for any of them excluding the E8600. Its really about how cheap do you want to go, how much bang for the buck or frames per dollar if you're a gamer [despite the fact that the gpu is key if you're a gamer and at the end of the day depending on your gaming res a E5200 might net you the same fps as an E8500]. You're really paying for the cache. $83 for 2mb, $110-120 for 3mb or $160-180 for 6mb because basically even the E5200 and E7300 can get you near 4Ghz. Granted an E0 E8x00 can net you a bit over 4Ghz but as aforementioned the difference between a 3.9Ghz E5200 and a 4.2Ghz E8500 when gaming at 1920x1200 is going to come down to the gpu rather than the cpu.
Considering you can save $50-100 going with the E52 or E73 that's the price difference between settling for a HD4850 or stepping up to a GTX260

 

[Mega666]

price to perf - E8400

 

[Hulk]

You really can make a case for any of them excluding the E8600. Its really about how cheap do you want to go, how much bang for the buck or frames per dollar if you're a gamer [despite the fact that the gpu is key if you're a gamer and at the end of the day depending on your gaming res a E5200 might net you the same fps as an E8500]. You're really paying for the cache. $83 for 2mb, $110-120 for 3mb or $160-180 for 6mb because basically even the E5200 and E7300 can get you near 4Ghz. Granted an E0 E8x00 can net you a bit over 4Ghz but as aforementioned the difference between a 3.9Ghz E5200 and a 4.2Ghz E8500 when gaming at 1920x1200 is going to come down to the gpu rather than the cpu.
Considering you can save $50-100 going with the E52 or E73 that's the price difference between settling for a HD4850 or stepping up to a GTX260

I see.

When it comes to gaming, what is the difference between having 2mb, 3mb, or 6mb of cache?

 

[Mega666]

I see.

When it comes to gaming, what is the difference between having 2mb, 3mb, or 6mb of cache?

not much. Hulk makes a good point.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e7200_4.html#sect0

 

[Riccochet]

not much. Hulk makes a good point.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e7200_4.html#sect0

After looking at that chart I'd save some cash for the lesser cache chip.

 

[Jayham]

I personally recommend getting an E8400. I don't think the price premium is worth it over getting an E8500 or E8600.

I agree 110% here, when I bought my e8400 I was caught up between e8400 e8500 and the e8600 9x vs 9.5x vs 10x multi e8400 best bang for buck equal or very similar to e8500 but the e8600 with net you a better overclock,

 

[Zero82z]

I'd say the E7300 is the best bang for the buck based on overall overclockability versus price, although the E8400 is also a great chip which can overclock a bit higher on average for not that much more money.

 

[King Lycan]

get the E7300