Originally Posted by Ropey
I find it interesting that some people believe that ES products are better than their more mature released brethren.
I have heard a few people state that the ES are better overclockers than their more mature brethren but if one looks to logic, then one will see that ES is wanted for their ability to raise and lower the multipliers and this is what makes them better overclockers as it adds another variable to the overclock. ES's are better due to the unlock, not the architecture vs a more mature stepping/released architecture.
Set an ES to 266MHz and the multiplier to 15 and you have a ~4.0GHz part. That being said, the more mature steppings/revisions are better overclockers for their revised architecture.
Take a B1 ES and a B2 L630B X6800. Set their multipliers both to 11 and the FSB to 425Mhz. Use identical platforms. The ES had a VID of 1.3250. There are X6800's L630B's with a VID of 1.21v. Does anyone really think that the ES will win? Where the ES will win is in its ability to raise the multiplier.
Comparing an ES chip to a XE chip is unfair. Both have the ability to default to any multiplier and thus adjust the multiplier up and down while maintaining reasonable NBCC. When comparing an ES chip to a not XE retail chip, you will find the ES to be far more stable when running in lower multipliers.
You have a ES E6600 and a E6600 Retail. You set the multiplier on both to 7, and then the FSB to 500Mhz. The ES chip will be much more stable than the retail chip.
Clearly older ES chips are not as good as more recent retail chip. But if you can get a retail chip with the newer revision, you are all set.