Overclock.net banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,845 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was wondering, is the e6300 better then the 4400 even at stock speeds?<br><br>
I will be getting a e6300,mobo, and vista ultimate for 200$ and was thinking of getting the 965 s3 and some ddr2 ram and just sell my amd cpu and board. is it worth it? Almost forgot, and my ram and old 7800GT thats on my closet chillen. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/images/smilies/tongue.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Stick out tounge caps">
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
24,372 Posts
Yes, the E6300 will be better
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,145 Posts
The E6300 at stock speed is better than 4400 at 2.5Ghz?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,845 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Alright, thats what I thought, I guess I will sell my 4400, RAM, and motherboard soon this month. Aswell with my 7800GT laying around.<br><br>
p.s. I feel dumb because I bought the 4400 as soon as the core2duo came out I should of just waited, ARGH!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
According to CPU Magazine, at stock speeds, the E6300 is extremely comparable to an FX-62 (using all the same hardware, save for the mobo). It comes within 2 seconds of the FX-62 in MP3 encoding, and exceeds it by a significant margin in video encoding.<br><br>
With even mild overclocking, it will easily exceed the X2 4400 in just about every benchmark, save for memory bandwidth testing, due to the X2's on-die memory controller vs. the northbridge-located memory controller Intel still uses.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: splat00n

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,406 Posts
E6300 at stock is slightly slower than FX60. Once you oc it to 2.2 ish the E6300 will pwn the FX
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
64,282 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>shajbot</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">The E6300 at stock speed is better than 4400 at 2.5Ghz?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
<br>
Yes it is due to its better core architecure.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
24,372 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>shajbot</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">The E6300 at stock speed is better than 4400 at 2.5Ghz?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Er... isn't the 4400 2.2 GHz?<br><br>
And yes, a slightly overclocked E6300 beats the FX
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,580 Posts
The E6300 (and any other C2D or C2E processor) has a wider (and shorter, I believe) pipeline than the X2, allowing it to do more instructions per clock cycle than the X2 is capable of. That's what allows the E6300 to approach & in some cases exceed the FX series processors capabilities at stock speeds, and leave them in the dust when overclocked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,845 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
nice, can't wait <img src="/images/smilies/smile.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Smile" class="inlineimg" /> I just really need to sell my machines quick before I fall short in cash.<br />
<br />
I feel so dumb, I recently noticed that I had a fan in front of my case not plugged in, so I plugged it in with the fan on the back, BUT I never plugged it with the power supply lol, so for like a month I was getting 50c stock cpu temps and 60c HD temps, I was like wow now that I have time I'm going to see wats going on and I see that my back and front fan weren't spinning so the air from the PSU and CPU were circulating -_- now HD is 50c and cpu is around 35c it should be lower but its much better then before.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top