• We are currently experiencing delays with our email service, which may affect logins and notifications. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience and appreciate your patience while we work to resolve the issue.

How much better would a X2 4400 be than a X2 3800 for encoding?

sprtfan

Senior member
Nov 17, 2003
257
5
81
I was told that the amount of cache would make a bid difference when encoding. Would the larger cache on the X2 4400 make enough of a difference to noticable reduce the time it would take? It would be worth the extra $75 to me if it does but if it is only going to save me a few minutes then it wouldn't be worth it. Any feedback would be great. thanks
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: sprtfan
I was told that the amount of cache would make a bid difference when encoding. Would the larger cache on the X2 4400 make enough of a difference to noticable reduce the time it would take? It would be worth the extra $75 to me if it does but if it is only going to save me a few minutes then it wouldn't be worth it. Any feedback would be great. thanks

If you clock up the 3800+ enough you can overcome the lesser cache and be faster than a stock 4400+. Of course, overclocking a 4400+ would be even better :D

For $75 I say go for it. (The 4400+)
 

sprtfan

Senior member
Nov 17, 2003
257
5
81
Originally posted by: bamacre
I'd say go E6300, or even E6400.

I could probably go with a E6300 and a Gigabyte S3 for about $124 more depending on what kind of ram I would need to get . I was going with a skt 939 because I was able to get an Asus A8NSLI deluxe board for $43. I would probably be better off selling the Asus board and going the Conroe route. At stock speeds the X2 4400 was pretty close to the E6300 I thought but once overclocked the E6300 was much faster.
I'm going to be using the computer as a media server for the most part so I want it to be stable.