x2 4200 or core 2 duo e6300?

[slicksilver]

core 2 duo is what I had in mind but the motherboards aren't out here yet in India. I need to get the system real quick and I'm not sure if it is goin to be worth the wait. Basically I'm trying to become a DBA so lotta OS changing installing oracle and the stuff you know is what I will be doing. No gaming whatsover. Should I just go with the 4200? its priced the same but mobos are readily available.

Let me know what you think guys

Thanks

 

[harpoon84]

Are you gonna overclock at all? If yes, E6300. If no, X2 4200+. At stock speeds they are quite similar in performance, and the X2 platform is cheaper. But the E6300 has the better overclocking headroom, at 3GHz+ it will leave any o/ced X2 far behind.

 

[slicksilver]

no OC just stock

 

[harpoon84]

Then grab an X2 4200+, similar performance to the E6300 but an overall cheaper platform.

 

[Keysplayr]

Woah Woah Woah Woah Woah!!!!
All, and I mean ALL review site benches show the E6300 faster than an X2 4200 and more often then not approaches X2 4600, 4800, and even X2 5000 performance. Once in a while, the E6300 even ties AMD's flagship FX-62.

Prove me wrong boys. No left wing extremist sites either. Reputable, known and well referred to sites will do just fine.

 

[cmrmrc]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Woah Woah Woah Woah Woah!!!!
All, and I mean ALL review site benches show the E6300 faster than an X2 4200 and more often then not approaches X2 4600, 4800, and even X2 5000 performance. Once in a while, the E6300 even ties AMD's flagship FX-62.

Prove me wrong boys. No left wing extremist sites either. Reputable, known and well referred to sites will do just fine.

Yes, overall E6300 is faster than 4200 about 5%....and YES in some apps, it can match the FX-62...but in overall it is slower than 4600, 4800...AND FX-62

 

[arctic388]

i wanted to ask this same question. i am considering the 6300 cause of all the reviews. but.... the 4200 system i can get for about 300 USD less for the whole system. to me the 6300 doesnt justify the extra $$$. i will not be doing any OC'ing. even though the 6300 performs a little better is it really noticable to the average user ?

 

[Furen]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Prove me wrong boys. No left wing extremist sites either. Reputable, known and well referred to sites will do just fine.

No left-wing extremists?What about activist judges? LOL

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Woah Woah Woah Woah Woah!!!!
All, and I mean ALL review site benches show the E6300 faster than an X2 4200 and more often then not approaches X2 4600, 4800, and even X2 5000 performance. Once in a while, the E6300 even ties AMD's flagship FX-62.

Prove me wrong boys. No left wing extremist sites either. Reputable, known and well referred to sites will do just fine.

The X2 4200+ is very close in performance to the E6300 in most benchmarks, and if the user isn't going to be overclock then it's not worth the $$$ to get an E6300.

 

[filmore crashcart]

No left-wing extremists?What about activist judges? LOL

For sure.... and don't forget, any misinformation regarding benchmark comparisons of amd x2 and intel c2d processors must, undoubltedly, be Clinton's fault.

 

[arctic388]

i'm now leaning towards AMD i think. unless i find a better/cheaper mobo for conroe when i get ready to order. i'll be gald to get anything compared to the 500mhz junk i have now.

 

[xpx]

E6300 is 229, and due to the integrated memory controller on amd chips, amd MBs are about 30$ cheaper...so a 259 cpu would fit in the spot- 4600+ at 266$ or at E6300 price the 4400+(232$)

 

[cmrmrc]

Originally posted by: arctic388
i wanted to ask this same question. i am considering the 6300 cause of all the reviews. but.... the 4200 system i can get for about 300 USD less for the whole system. to me the 6300 doesnt justify the extra $$$. i will not be doing any OC'ing. even though the 6300 performs a little better is it really noticable to the average user ?

i doubt that the extra little performance is noticeable...i mean i don't notice any difference in general on my x2@2.4 or @2.8...except in apps like winrar and some encoding where the time is shown.

 

[dexvx]

E6300s are now readily available in the US for ~$200ish (check ZZF). AM2-4200's are around $180ish. Motherboard difference is nil. The cheapest Core2 board that isnt from VIA are the 945 ones that cost around $70.

 

[arctic388]

i didnt know a 945 board would work i thought it had to be 965 or 975.

the 6300 i find for 200 and the 4200 i find for 180.

to build my amd box is 810.93 and my conore box is 1010.41
amd i'll use onboard sound where the intel board supposedly sucks so bad i threw in a sound card. 27.99 and 1gb ram with amd and 2gb ram with conroe that difference is 80.00.

i was really going with the egg but 100 dolars in tax will force me to use another company for most my parts.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: cmrmrc
Yes, overall E6300 is faster than 4200 about 5%....and YES in some apps, it can match the FX-62...but in overall it is slower than 4600, 4800...AND FX-62

Yep, that's right. The measly E6300 at stock speed is faster than an X2 4200+. And in some areas it keeps up with the FX-62 even.

Seeing as how the OP only mentioned E6300 or 4200+ I think you'd be a fool to recommend anything but the Conroe. If the OP doesn't want to overclock he can even grab a cheap ($60) ASRock board and re-use his video and RAM.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: arctic388
to build my amd box is 810.93 and my conore box is 1010.41
amd i'll use onboard sound where the intel board supposedly sucks so bad i threw in a sound card. 27.99 and 1gb ram with amd and 2gb ram with conroe that difference is 80.00.

i was really going with the egg but 100 dolars in tax will force me to use another company for most my parts.

For the onboard sound question: they both use the same onboard sound. I'm not sure where you get that Intel boards onboard sound is worse; they use the same 3rd party OEM's (C-Media, Realtek, SigmaTel chips). Probably has to do with the overhyped Soundstorm back in the day.

I wont comment on the memory, cause its twice as much.

As for the 945 solution:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813157096

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Furen

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
Prove me wrong boys. No left wing extremist sites either. Reputable, known and well referred to sites will do just fine.

No left-wing extremists?What about activist judges? LOL

LOL, I think you got the drift though.

 

[PingSpike]

I just can't wrap my head around not overclocking the 6300...its just begging for it. I recently acquired a good deal on a old s939 X2...but the conroe stuff is definately nice. AMD was smart to drop their prices to where they are though, they're still a very valid alternative at the lower price points.

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: PingSpike
I just can't wrap my head around not overclocking the 6300...its just begging for it.

Heh, yeah, but some people just won't touch overclocking with a 10ft pole. :/

It's hard for us to understand, considering if you overclock you can match or beat an X6800 for 1/5 the price, but what the heck, each to their own.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: dexvx
E6300s are now readily available in the US for ~$200ish (check ZZF). AM2-4200's are around $180ish. Motherboard difference is nil. The cheapest Core2 board that isnt from VIA are the 945 ones that cost around $70.

It may be a nit, but $83<>$70 you said above. And AMD has them at $62 for the same mfg for AM2 platform. So it is a little less. And even an X2 3800+ at $150 would be fine for what he is doing......

 

[Furen]

Originally posted by: harpoon84

Originally posted by: PingSpike
I just can't wrap my head around not overclocking the 6300...its just begging for it.

Heh, yeah, but some people just won't touch overclocking with a 10ft pole. :/

It's hard for us to understand, considering if you overclock you can match or beat an X6800 for 1/5 the price, but what the heck, each to their own.

Personally, I overclock everything just for fun and ultimately end up going back to stock or very light clocks. Reliability is a great thing, especially if you're not the only person using the systems. When working on a project late at night the last thing I want is my overclock making the whole thing crap out.

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: Furen

Originally posted by: harpoon84

Originally posted by: PingSpike
I just can't wrap my head around not overclocking the 6300...its just begging for it.

Heh, yeah, but some people just won't touch overclocking with a 10ft pole. :/

It's hard for us to understand, considering if you overclock you can match or beat an X6800 for 1/5 the price, but what the heck, each to their own.

Personally, I overclock everything just for fun and ultimately end up going back to stock or very light clocks. Reliability is a great thing, especially if you're not the only person using the systems. When working on a project late at night the last thing I want is my overclock making the whole thing crap out.

That's why you stress test the overclock to make sure it's 100% stable.

I run all my processors heavily overclocked, but I make sure it's 100% stable before I run it for 24/7 usage. I like the fact that I can beat the best processors availabe at the time at a fraction of the price.

 

[Furen]

Originally posted by: harpoon84

Originally posted by: Furen

Originally posted by: harpoon84

Originally posted by: PingSpike
I just can't wrap my head around not overclocking the 6300...its just begging for it.

Heh, yeah, but some people just won't touch overclocking with a 10ft pole. :/

It's hard for us to understand, considering if you overclock you can match or beat an X6800 for 1/5 the price, but what the heck, each to their own.

Personally, I overclock everything just for fun and ultimately end up going back to stock or very light clocks. Reliability is a great thing, especially if you're not the only person using the systems. When working on a project late at night the last thing I want is my overclock making the whole thing crap out.

That's why you stress test the overclock to make sure it's 100% stable.

I run all my processors heavily overclocked, but I make sure it's 100% stable before I run it for 24/7 usage. I like the fact that I can beat the best processors availabe at the time at a fraction of the price.

You cannot make sure your system is 100% stable. I've had systems that are "stress-test stable" with everything suddenly crash when I launch a certain obscure application. Going back to stock or scaling back on the overclock usually solves this so this can obviously be blamed on the overclock.

 

[Markfw]

I have to agree with Furen here. I even went for 6 minths 24/7 stable, then had it crap out on me during an important build, so I backed the OC down. Been a year now....