E2160 overclocked vs E6750 on P35 board

[angry hampster]

I'm thinking about switching to Intel when my tax return comes back in February. I know I want a P35 chipset because I've heard nothing but good things, but I'm stumped on procs. I know I can easily overclock a 2160 (with my Zerotherm Nirvana) to over 3.0GHz. Assuming equal clock speed with the 6750, what kind of performance differences would I notice due to the lower cache size on the 2160?


...Also toss in the E4500 just for argument's sake. Thanks in advance!



edit: forgot to mention that the machine is primarily used for gaming and photo editing.

 

[rip]

Have fun

 

[angry hampster]

I've seen that chart, but I want to know how it will stack up when overclocked.

 

[imported_Husky55]

Originally posted by: angry hampster
I've seen that chart, but I want to know how it will stack up when overclocked.

10-15% if you do video encoding. No difference if you do web surfing or email. 4500 is in the middle. About 7-8% depending on applications.

 

[angry hampster]

10-15% what? Increase in performance?

 

[Accord99]

This Chinese review comparing 4MB/2MB/1MB L2 C2D based processors at 3GHz is probably the closest to answering your question:

http://www.pconline.com.cn/diy...ews/0704/993288_3.html

 

[lopri]

It is difficult to asses it without straps, but since Intel has been pushing high FSB with their recent chipsets (Most P35 boards would default to 333 strap when overclocking, I'd think), I'd say E6750 would be noticeably faster. Not to an extent you can actually get work done faster in any meaningful way, but your computing will feel will generally snappier with 4MB L2. This is especially true under Vista, and when gaming.

Now, if your board is capable of high FSB while staying under lower strap, the performance difference will be smaller. On the same line, memory performance affects the general performance (relatively) more with a small L2.

If you're about to switch from AMD, the best option at this point would be E8400. It's cheap enough ($183), and the performance will be even better than E6850 thanks to the bigger L2. Lower power/heat is a icing on the cake. It's default clock speed is 3.0GHz so there is no need for overclocking if that's what you've aimed. If you overclock, that chip will last for quite some time.

 

[DSF]

By the time you're overclocking a Core2Duo to 3GHz, you've passed the point where you're going to notice a difference in gaming or day-to-day operations. Regardless of cache size, a Core2Duo at that clock speed is fast enough. In benchmarks you'll see a difference, but you won't notice one while gaming.

 

[angry hampster]

Originally posted by: lopri


If you're about to switch from AMD, the best option at this point would be E8400. It's cheap enough ($183), and the performance will be even better than E6850 thanks to the bigger L2. Lower power/heat is a icing on the cake. It's default clock speed is 3.0GHz so there is no need for overclocking if that's what you've aimed. If you overclock, that chip will last for quite some time.

I had no clue the 8xxx series was going to be that cheap. What is the expected release date?

 

[upsciLLion]

Originally posted by: angry hampster

Originally posted by: lopri


If you're about to switch from AMD, the best option at this point would be E8400. It's cheap enough ($183), and the performance will be even better than E6850 thanks to the bigger L2. Lower power/heat is a icing on the cake. It's default clock speed is 3.0GHz so there is no need for overclocking if that's what you've aimed. If you overclock, that chip will last for quite some time.

I had no clue the 8xxx series was going to be that cheap. What is the expected release date?

I believe January 20th.

 

[Lazark]

Originally posted by: DSF
By the time you're overclocking a Core2Duo to 3GHz, you've passed the point where you're going to notice a difference in gaming or day-to-day operations. Regardless of cache size, a Core2Duo at that clock speed is fast enough. In benchmarks you'll see a difference, but you won't notice one while gaming.

is that true??? I was thinking of buying a E6750 but the E2180 is so much cheap and I don`t bother is I have to do some O/C to get to 3ghz (with the proper fan). Im building that rig just for gaming.

thanks

 

[Pabster]

Look at the numbers. It's really true! :laugh:

There isn't a huge difference between the E2xxx, E4xxx, and E6xxx when running at identical clocks. More in some areas, almost none in others. You'd be FAR better off investing the extra $$$ in a better video card, more RAM, etc.

 

[angry hampster]

Perhaps I'll wait until the Wolfdale release later this month and see where prices go on the 4xxx and 6xxx. I assume the Wolfdales won't *actually* be released at MSRP.

 

[lopri]

I will go on a limb here and say the opposite: You won't notice the difference in benchmarks but the difference will be experienced under multitasking and gaming. I have an E6600 and E2160 both @3.60GHz so my opinion isn't completely unfounded. Common benchmarks give identical results (except, well, Super Pi) between the two but E6600 feels smoother when switching tasks and playing games with background apps, etc.

 

[Avalon]

4MB of cache is going to net you around 15% more performance typically in games compared to the E2xxx series.

 

[Mondoman]

lopri, don't you think your perceived differences might instead be due to nVidia vs. ATI graphics cards & drivers, Intel vs. nVidia chipsets, or 32-bit XP vs. 64-bit Vista?

 

[mageslayer]

Originally posted by: lopri
It is difficult to asses it without straps, but since Intel has been pushing high FSB with their recent chipsets (Most P35 boards would default to 333 strap when overclocking, I'd think), I'd say E6750 would be noticeably faster. Not to an extent you can actually get work done faster in any meaningful way, but your computing will feel will generally snappier with 4MB L2. This is especially true under Vista, and when gaming.

Now, if your board is capable of high FSB while staying under lower strap, the performance difference will be smaller. On the same line, memory performance affects the general performance (relatively) more with a small L2.

If you're about to switch from AMD, the best option at this point would be E8400. It's cheap enough ($183), and the performance will be even better than E6850 thanks to the bigger L2. Lower power/heat is a icing on the cake. It's default clock speed is 3.0GHz so there is no need for overclocking if that's what you've aimed. If you overclock, that chip will last for quite some time.

asses.. *cough* *cough*