Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 & E6400: Tremendous Value Through Overclocking
by Anand Lal Shimpi on July 26, 2006 8:17 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
The Test
The performance results in this review are largely the same as those from our earlier Core 2 review. However, there are a few changes to the test configuration that are worth noting:
- The E6300/E6400 were run on the ASUS P5W DH Deluxe as it is a better motherboard for overclocking than the Intel D975X. Performance differences between the Intel and ASUS boards are negligible and thus the results are directly comparable to one another.
- The E6300 numbers in this review are a bit higher than in our last review because we are using a B1 stepping E6300, compared to the A1 stepping E6300 used in our previous article. The A1 CPU we used in the last article was a pre-production chip, while the B1 CPUs we're using here today are production CPUs that offer slightly better performance in some cases. All other Core 2 and Core 2 Extreme CPUs in this article are all B1 or later.
- As we mentioned earlier, we did not have a Socket-AM2 X2 3800+ on hand that we could use for overclocking results, but you can get an idea of what an overclocked X2 3800+ would perform like by looking at the performance results for the X2 4600+, 5000+ and the FX-62. We looked at Athlon 64 X2 3800+ overclocking in the past on socket 939, and we would expect the AM2 chips to overclock similarly.
- We've eliminated all of the Pentium D lineup from the bar graphs except for the Pentium EE 965, which is included as a reference point.
| CPU: | AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 (2.8GHz/1MBx2) AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ (2.6GHz/512KBx2) AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (2.4GHz/512KBx2) AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ (2.2GHz/512KBx2) AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (2.0GHz/512KBx2) Intel Pentium Extreme Edition 965 (3.73GHz/2MBx2) Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 (2.93GHz/4MB) Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (2.66GHz/4MB) Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 (2.40GHz/4MB) Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 (2.13GHz/2MB) Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 (1.86GHz/2MB) |
| Motherboard: | MSI K9A Platinum (Socket AM2) ASUS P5W DH Deluxe (LGA-775) |
| Chipset: | ATI RD580 Intel 975X |
| Chipset Drivers: | Catalyst 6.6 (ATI) Intel 7.2.2.1007 (Intel) |
| Hard Disk: | Seagate 7200.9 300GB SATA |
| Memory: | Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 4-4-4-12 (1GB x 2) |
| Video Card: | 2 x ATI Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 6.6 |
| Desktop Resolution: | 1280 x 1024 - 32-bit @ 60Hz (1600 x 1200 for games) |
| OS: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
137 Comments
View All Comments
coldpower27 - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link
Assuming you have the Socket AM2 platform, then yes you can, remember 5000+ only exists for Socket AM2, and not Socket 939.Since that platform is relatively new, only a handful who have would consider upgrading to anything.
Gigahertz19 - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link
I'm definetly going with the Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 @ 2.4GHz since it is the cheapest one that has 4Mb of L2 cache and overclock it to 3GHz or whatever is stable.Olaf van der Spek - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link
I'm also missing any mention of single core solutions. Sure, dual core is the future, but in the present, single core is just as fast for games and a lot cheaper.An Athlon 64 3800+ 2.4 ghz costs only 110 dollar/euro.
krisia2006 - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link
AMD left me wanting for an affordable dual core cpu and Intel answered.I bought the Pentium Ds and will buy the Core 2 Duo.
In the present, I play games fine on my Pentium Ds.
Olaf van der Spek - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link
Isn't way too much attention given to CF/SLI?
Given the costs, it's only interesting to 'diehard' gamers that spend very much money on their systems.
JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link
The benefits in some games are huge, and I would say just about any gamer would at least *think* about CF/SLI before making a decision as to what to buy. That doesn't mean they have to go that route, but without CF/SLI you will certainly be GPU limited at higher resolutions. This is a well-established fact, as in recent titles you can't run 1600x1200 or 1680x1050 with 4xAA/8xAF and still get CPU-limited results.samuraiBX - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link
Hey guys, I like the article, but I was wondering, why did you go with medium settings instead of ultra high or high? I'd like to see the performance in that arena more than the medium settings. Any chance we could get those? Thanks!coldpower27 - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link
The performance is obvious, even on a Crossfire system with image quality settings tunred up you will get a straight line down the middle between NetBurst, K8, and Core based products due to the GPU being the bottleneck, since the emphasis was CPU performance, they need to kick back on the GPU settings a tad to make sue the CPU is the limiting factor.Real world, a Pentium D 915/945 would be sufficient for gaming.
bob661 - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link
What impresses me the most about these Conroe's is their OCing ability. Almost as fast as a Conroe EE for less than a 1/4 of its price.mkruer - Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - link
You might want to pick up the new stepping 6 (mass produces ones) A lot of people over at xteamesystesm are complaining that the stepping 6 doesn’t over clock nearly as well as the stepping 5 and that the temperatures are staring to go though the roof.Personally I would love to know if this is true
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php...">http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php...