Pentium Dual-Core E2200

[ReefaMadness]

For those that like their numbers.


http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...y/pentium-e2160_6.html


From that link:

So, we can conclude that the size of L2 cache memory affects the performance in office tasks in the first place. As for most applications dealing with multimedia content creation and editing, you shouldn?t overestimate the importance of large L2 cache. You will only be able to improve the performance just a little bit by choosing a Core based CPU with the maximum L2 cache: 3-5% at the most.

We decided to discuss the results obtained in gaming applications in the end, as they would be completely different. Take a look:

(click on above link for the graphs - the conclusion on the impact of cache on gaming is below)

True, the games are very sensitive to the changes in CPU L2 cache memory size. The biggest effect is noticeable when we drop the size of L2 cache to 1MB. That is why the new Pentium E2000 processors will hardly become a good choice for gamers. It makes much more sense to invest in more expensive Core 2 Duo in this case: even a CPU from E4000 series will do if you are looking to build an inexpensive gaming system.

 

[Tiamat]

Originally posted by: ReefaMadness
For those that like their numbers.


http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...y/pentium-e2160_6.html


From that link:

So, we can conclude that the size of L2 cache memory affects the performance in office tasks in the first place. As for most applications dealing with multimedia content creation and editing, you shouldn?t overestimate the importance of large L2 cache. You will only be able to improve the performance just a little bit by choosing a Core based CPU with the maximum L2 cache: 3-5% at the most.

We decided to discuss the results obtained in gaming applications in the end, as they would be completely different. Take a look:

(click on above link for the graphs - the conclusion on the impact of cache on gaming is below)

True, the games are very sensitive to the changes in CPU L2 cache memory size. The biggest effect is noticeable when we drop the size of L2 cache to 1MB. That is why the new Pentium E2000 processors will hardly become a good choice for gamers. It makes much more sense to invest in more expensive Core 2 Duo in this case: even a CPU from E4000 series will do if you are looking to build an inexpensive gaming system.

Thats an interesting comment in the last paragraph. There are many people who are very concrete in "I can only spend x dollars". 100$ is roughly the difference between a 2xxx and 6xxx. But, 100$ is the difference between ATI3850 and nVidea G92.

Would it be 'correct' to assume that the optimized purchase be a 4xxx cpu and 3870 GPU? Or would you weight the GPU more [G92 + 2xxx] (strictly for 1920x1080 gaming)...

Note: Assuming the processor is at 3ghz w/ whatever OC is neccessary.

Perhaps worrying about this is meaningless (or academic at best)?

 

[Xaijin]

Originally posted by: PliotronX

Originally posted by: Xaijin
You dont think 100% OC's are better? What kind of crack do you smoke?

The kind that makes you compare maximum frequency, grasshopper.

The guy's argument is that it doesnt OC well. It does, how many chips can you name will achieve a 100% OC? Maximum clock speed does not tell if something OC's well, and is very short sighted compared to the overall picture.

For arguments sake, lets say there's a 5 ghz wolfdale and it OC's to 5.5 ghz, and we take another wolfdale that's 3 ghz and OC it to 5 ghz. Which processor OC's better?

This is not a hard question.

 

[PliotronX]

Originally posted by: Xaijin

Originally posted by: PliotronX
The kind that makes you compare maximum frequency, grasshopper.

The guy's argument is that it doesnt OC well.

Toadeater did not state that the E2 series does not OC well, he said it does not OC better than the E4 or E6 series which is a fact. He was responding to ExarKun33's post about the smaller cache running cooler allowing a 5-10% OC gain, presumably in maximum OC based on the context. This would be incorrect as it depends on the particular chip's yield. In fact, E2's use cruddy grease to interface the die with the IHS which causes a 10 degree jump in temps compared with the upper tier chips that interface using solder or epoxy which generally leads to requiring more voltage to hit the same speeds in the E2 series (again, depending on yield and grease application).

 

[toadeater]

Yes, PliotronX is right, I meant maximum OC. Just look at how many e2xxx need a voltage boost past 3.0GHz compared to e6xxx's, or how many can reach over 3.6GHz. Although, I didn't know about the IHS grease.

I doubt the e2200 is from a better bin than e21xx or e4xxx, so there's no reason to buy it for overclocking since you'll be paying extra for nothing.

Anyway, the Penryns are almost here...

 

[lopri]

Although there are many variables to consider (straps, memory setup, etc.), I don't think the price premium of E2200 is worth over the lesser models. At that price point, one should consider E4x00 series. I saw E4500 for $109 at a local MicroCenter. But the real attractive CPU for me is the E4600. It has x12 multi which is the highest among current Core 2 based CPUs. (sans Extreme series, of course) With a right motherboard, the x12 multi can give you so much freedom (i.e. fun) fiddling straps and memory configurations. Unfortunately that thing is almost $150, at which point one can get a 4MB L2 CPU with a few bucks more.. Intel's pricing strategy is quite amazing, to say the least. But the bottom line is that Intel won't give a higher multiplier without price premium.

Note that these smaller L2 CPUs' performance is heavily (relatively speaking) affected by memory configuration. For instance, going from DDR2-667 to DDR2-1066 might make little difference for an E6850, the difference will be much more pronounced with E2xx0s. It's kinda natural if you think about it - and it makes it fun to play with these 1MB L2 CPUs.