Allendale vs. conroe

[Oblivion121]

Hey, could anyone tell me what the differences are between the c2d allendale and the e6300 c2d?

 

[stevty2889]

E4300=allendale, manufactured with 2mb of cache
E6300=conroe, manufactured with 4mb of cache, half the cache disabled

 

[Furen]

The E4300 is a 1.8GHz that also lacks VT, the E6300 is a 1.86GHz part with all the trimmings.

A good thing about the E4300 is that it runs on a 200MHz FSB at stock, so you're less reliant on the motherboard and memory when overclocking. In fact, a 3.6GHz clock speed only requires a 400MHz FSB, which is pretty attainable on many motherboards out there and will run DDR2 800 on a 1:1 ratio. The E6300 is a better perfomer at stock but, for the most part, the difference in performance is negligible. I'd venture to say that the E4300 is the better buy but I still consider it overpriced (it should be a ~$130-140 part, not $170ish).

 

[TBSN]

I've actually not heard of these 4300's. I was considering getting a 6400 and OC'ing it. Should I consider an E4400 (Is there such a thing?)

Also, what is the difference between the 6300 and the 4300 besides one having a 2M of non-functioning cache and FSB differences? I always thought that FSB was a term that had to do with the motherboard...

 

[Zim]

Be careful before buying an e4300. The jury is still out on whether they are as good overclockers as the Conroes. On paper they should be, but in practice they may not. Reading thru forums and users reviews I find lots of evidence that they aren't. I recently paid $40 more for an e6400 over an e4300... just to play safe.