ekkk core 2 dou aint aLL THAT

[raggie33]

for those who wanna go from amd 2 intel maybe take a step back.this dual core dou at stock speed is slower then my amd 6000.but it is running less hot and less watage
now my full sytem with out monitor at idle is around 57 wattas was more like 102 watts with my amd 6000..i have intel e6300 if ya are wondering.i cant oc it to high cause the mobo is a elcheapo board.but i think i still preafre amd.just a heads up from my point of veiw

 

[Reptilezs]

clock speed really has no bearing when comparing different processors, especially different brands.

 

[raggie33]

im running super pi

 

[3rd_shift]

Check this out for more info on these processors and more.

www.tomshardware.com

 

[geepondy]

What AMD CPU are you talking about, the X2 6000? If so, it costs considerably more then the Intel E6300, more in line with the E6600. In fact at newegg, the E6600 is a little cheaper then the X2 6000. In most bench marks, an AMD X2 6000 will probably beat an Intel E6300.

 

[raggie33]

yeppers x2 6000 may be selling her next week im to tired to load xp back on her everytime i change pcs with xp i have to call microsoft

 

[RA40]

I just built up a 5600+ X2 AM2 rig, Asus M2N SLI-Deluxe, 2G memory and a 500G SATA drive. It's running Folding@Home and even though it's on one core, it puts out some heat. :thumbsdow

The older 939 rig with a 3800+ 2.4 GHz, MSI K8N-SLI, 3G memory and 320G SATA drive is nowhere close in heat output. I like that. For the Folding projects, the differences between the two are minimal, the 939 completes a work unit about 2-3 hours slower. Given the comfort level in my workroom, I'm not pleased with the AM2 rig. Maybe the Brisbane AM2 core is cooler.

The C2D Intel CPU's...they are fast. The guys in my group are easily equal if not beating my 5600+. with clock speeds ~2 Ghz.

As for loading XP... I have back-up drives for each machine. One drive is activated but basically sterile copy of the OS, main apps and main data. When I need to experiment, it's simply cloning a drive to play for that machine. No PITA having to call MS for an activation key sequence each time. Within my EUA as I understand it.

YMMV

 

[Fallingwater]

for those who wanna go from amd 2 intel maybe take a step back.this dual core dou at stock speed is slower then my amd 6000.but it is running less hot and less watage
now my full sytem with out monitor at idle is around 57 wattas was more like 102 watts with my amd 6000..i have intel e6300 if ya are wondering.i cant oc it to high cause the mobo is a elcheapo board.but i think i still preafre amd.just a heads up from my point of veiw

I'm sorry, but... HUH?

 

[Neg2LED]

i hate to say it raggie, but Core 2 Duo IS all that.....

it's AWESOME. beats the pants off an equal price AMD chip, runs cool and quiet, low power...

i used to only buy AMD processors for the last 5 years....now i've changed to Intel.

i hate to say it, but Intel is 2 steps ahead of AMD on this one.

--neg

 

[evan9162]

The C2D e6300 is nearly the SLOWEST C2D out there (1.86Ghz).

The x2 6000 is the FASTEST Athlon XP out there (3Ghz).

As you can see from this article:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2933
(and there are plenty out there that echo those results)

The x2 6000 can barely match even a modestly clocked C2D. It is illogical to compare the x2 6000 to the C2D e6300 and make any kind of general statement about C2D processors in general.

The x2 6000 is equal to between an e6400 (2.1Ghz) and e6600 (2.4Ghz), but doesn't seem to be priced extremely competitively, and sucks down a lot of power.

e6400: $187, 65W
e6600: $223, 65W
x2 6000: $229, 125W

Oddly, Intel and AMD have swapped positions with the release of C2D. 18 months ago, Intel had much higher clocked chips, with terrible power requirements, and higher prices that still coudln't match AMDs slower clocked, lower priced, and cooler CPUs. Things change quickly in the technology world...

 

[raggie33]

now i see i made a mistake. some reason i was a tad thinking backwards i thought the 6300 was one of the top intels.now i see the flaws in my thinking

 

[geepondy]

Raggie, with the 6000 X2 and the E6300, you still got two mighty fine CPUs. I'm still running with my P4 2.23. If things go well, I hope to have a Core 2 duo system fairly soon but it will have to last me a few years just like this one has.

 

[eluminator]

I'll probably upgrade in a year or two. I would do it to get a modern motherboard with the new fangled PCI bus and more SATA ports. My old Pentium Northwoods really don't need upgrading. They are doing the job nicely.

Of course Raggie can whip my butt if I got into a super pi contest, but I can live with that

 

[raggie33]

lol im lucky i always find deals and am able to trade my way up.sometimes pople pay me in pc parts. for pc repairs .but there is way newer cooler stuff like the quad core stuff frys had a insane sale on a quad core pcu a few weeks ago but sadly its stillway outa my price range.lol i would love quad core

 

[evan9162]

If you're looking for a quad, wait a month or so. Intel's Q3 price cuts will put the quad-core 6600 (2.4Ghz) at around $266.

 

[bfg9000]

E6300 is just about the worst C2D to select from an overclocking standpoint, since it requires an expensive mobo and memory to handle the high FSBs needed. OTOH I got an E4300 when it first came out and have been running it at 100% overclock (3.6GHz) ever since using inexpensive memory (1:1@800MHz so not even overclocked) and a relatively cheap board for my game machine.

No, in normal use it doesn't feel any faster than a good 3+GHz Northwood setup (because the bottleneck there is generally the hardddisk) but it is way faster in games (note that most games are limited by the video card but simulators like flight sims are usually cpu-limited). Quad-core and large caches still do not provide any significant gains for such uses compared to extremely high-clocked dual-cores, so unless you are looking for bragging rights it is far better to drop the extra money into the video card for gaming (have an 8800GTX)...

For work, all of the workstations I have here are running seriously undervolted (1.25v) Northwoods because they are quite fast enough at default speed, and any more results in far more noticeable heat output than performance improvement. Overclocking in general is also probably not a great idea for a work computer, and you wouldn't be doing anyone any favors by folding with an unstable machine either. How would you feel if that elusive cancer cure was delayed because of errors from your machine?

Super Pi and Prime95 are excellent stability tests but my experience is that a machine that can easily pass one test for 24h can fail another immediately. Couple that with the inevitable degradation over time (dust buildup, electromigration from scary high voltages) and it's probably best to only run a machine on the ragged edge if it's for "play."

Remember folks, compared to a machine from a dozen years ago,

The CPU can now be 200x faster in terms of MIPS
The memory can be 30x faster than the old asynchronous simms
The hard disk sequential transfer rate can be 10x faster
The hard disk average random access time is... exactly the same or even worse

What do you think is the bottleneck? Given that, do you really think a faster CPU can ever really feel like "all that" much of an improvement for general web surfing use? I mean, check out a slow CPU with a really fast disk.

 

[raggie33]

i have my 6300 at 300x7. thats as high as my mobo goes..i am missing my amd x2 6000 but she loves electricty so much

 

[raggie33]

ps whats better at folding c2d or x2 i mean will this 6300 at stock be faster at folding then my amd x2 6000

 

[bfg9000]

From the description of your board, I'll guess you have the venerable Fry's "free" combo special ECS P4M800Pro-M V2 Motherboard with AGP and single channel memory (well two, but one channel is for DDR and the other for DDR2 and you can't use them both at the same time). It's a reliable no-frills board and I've built a number of systems with them (yes, I now always just set them at the 300MHz maximum) but the limited memory bus doesn't exactly make it a top performer.

However folding is mostly CPU limited so memory performance isn't too critical there, and I'd expect the C2D overclocked to 2.1GHz to just about match an X2 6000+ at the stock 3GHz while using less power. Of course in more memory intensive applications your 2.1GHz C2D with single-channel memory will probably be a bit slower than your old 6000+ system--so you are not just imagining things. It's the memory bus.

I certainly hope you have an AGP card plugged in (any low voltage AGP card) because using the onboard video will seriously drain what little memory bandwidth there is already.

 

[raggie33]

From the description of your board, I'll guess you have the venerable Fry's "free" combo special ECS P4M800Pro-M V2 Motherboard with AGP and single channel memory (well two, but one channel is for DDR and the other for DDR2 and you can't use them both at the same time). It's a reliable no-frills board and I've built a number of systems with them (yes, I now always just set them at the 300MHz maximum) but the limited memory bus doesn't exactly make it a top performer.

However folding is mostly CPU limited so memory performance isn't too critical there, and I'd expect the C2D overclocked to 2.1GHz to just about match an X2 6000+ at the stock 3GHz while using less power. Of course in more memory intensive applications your 2.1GHz C2D with single-channel memory will probably be a bit slower than your old 6000+ system--so you are not just imagining things. It's the memory bus.

I certainly hope you have an AGP card plugged in (any low voltage AGP card) because using the onboard video will seriously drain what little memory bandwidth there is already.

realy?im useing on board only agp card i have is a ati aiw 9800 i aint useing it cause it seems to be power hungry i wish the board had pcie cause i have a 7600 gt that is morre better on power and eats the ati up in speed i dont game well i will sometimes play games like quake 3