6300 vs X2 4600

[imported_Com80787]

Well I've done my pricing today. The two possible rig options I have that almost max out my cash are either the Core 2 6300 or X2 4600. Both should be far better than my old Athlon 64 2800 socket 754 chip.

I've been reading the benchmarks and it looks like both the X2 4600 and Core 2 6300 are neck and neck for the most part. Can anyone advise me which would be the best choice of these two? I'm kind of torn between them. I won't be doing any overclocking.

Thanks

 

[Figure]

well like u said these things are basically neck and neck,with the E6300 probably being slightly faster...

so really it doesnt matter which one u pick,they are both great CPU's , so basically get the one that is cheaper...

u said u arnt going to be overclocking? if u get the E6300 u gotta overclock dude u just gotta,u would be crazy if u didnt,as these things with a small overclock would be eviquivilent to a 5000+ etc...

personally i would get the E6300

 

[imported_Com80787]

Originally posted by: Figure
well like u said these things are basically neck and neck,with the E6300 probably being slightly faster...

so really it doesnt matter which one u pick,they are both great CPU's , so basically get the one that is cheaper...

u said u arnt going to be overclocking? if u get the E6300 u gotta overclock dude u just gotta,u would be crazy if u didnt,as these things with a small overclock would be eviquivilent to a 5000+ etc...

personally i would get the E6300

Hmmm I've read the Core 2 Duos get big overclocking advantages but would I have to buy an expensive heatsink so the 6300 doesn't burn up? I'm guessing the retail heatsink won't work very well?

 

[Mucker]

If you're building new, 6300 all the way. The X2 4600 will most likely not OC past 2800 MHz. The 6300 @ 3000 MHz will destroy the OC'd 4600...

Good read here: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-shootout.html

 

[imported_Com80787]

Originally posted by: Mucker
If you're building new, 6300 all the way. The X2 4600 will most likely not OC past 2800 MHz. The 6300 @ 3000 MHz will destroy the OC'd 4600...

I didn't realize the 6300 could overclock all the way to 3000??? What heatsink do I need to do that?

 

[Mucker]

One example: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=108937&highlight=6300

Being these are so new, only time will give us a good average of where these will end up. Be it a 4600 or 6300, if you OC you're going to need a good aftermarket HSF or water. The experts can comment on those.....

Even non-OC'd I'd go for a 6300, you may get the urge to play around in the future...

 

[River Side]

if you're building new.. and are looking higher than the 3800+ X2, Conroe is the way to go.. PERIOD.

 

[kknd1967]

totally agree
the dirty cheap 3800+X2 seems to be the only interesting part from AMD for now

Originally posted by: River Side
if you're building new.. and are looking higher than the 3800+ X2, Conroe is the way to go.. PERIOD.

 

[gobucks]

OCing the e6300 shouldn't require extravagant heating if you're just gonna OC a little bit. they're 65nm chips and the power consumption is really low, so i think you should be able to hit 2.5GHz with stock cooling. If you wanna try for like 3.0-3.5GHz, then you'd better get some nice cooling.

And i agree, it is a crime not to OC the e6300. even if you only take it to 2.4GHz, it'll be as fast as an FX-62, AMD's fastest chip (which currently costs $800 btw).

 

[Hidden Hippo]

Go for the E6300, as has been said, purely for the overclocking factor. There are some insane overclocks with cheap coolers (sub £10) which have managed a stable 430 ish FSB.

 

[orangat]

The 6300 runs cooler and is way cheaper than the AMD 4600+ so its a no brainer if you are buying new. If you are upgrading from a 939 mb however, sticking with AMD might make sense.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: orangat
The 6300 runs cooler and is way cheaper than the AMD 4600+ so its a no brainer if you are buying new. If you are upgrading from a 939 mb however, sticking with AMD might make sense.

Exactly.

The good boards are expensive right now, so if you aren't looking to start over new, a cheap X2 might be a good placeholder for a few months.

Otherwise, go for the Conroe.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Com80787
Well I've done my pricing today. The two possible rig options I have that almost max out my cash are either the Core 2 6300 or X2 4600. Both should be far better than my old Athlon 64 2800 socket 754 chip.

I've been reading the benchmarks and it looks like both the X2 4600 and Core 2 6300 are neck and neck for the most part. Can anyone advise me which would be the best choice of these two? I'm kind of torn between them. I won't be doing any overclocking.

Thanks

Remember AM2 uses DDR2 memory so take that into account as well as the C2D does. It's really up to you, but I will say this... the motherboards for overclocking the C2D are almost $100 more expensive than a good AM2 motherboard that can overclock well. That alone makes me frown on the C2D at the moment. (note the Intel motherboard isn't in stock)

For instance http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131011
vs http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131025

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: Com80787
Well I've done my pricing today. The two possible rig options I have that almost max out my cash are either the Core 2 6300 or X2 4600. Both should be far better than my old Athlon 64 2800 socket 754 chip.

I've been reading the benchmarks and it looks like both the X2 4600 and Core 2 6300 are neck and neck for the most part. Can anyone advise me which would be the best choice of these two? I'm kind of torn between them. I won't be doing any overclocking.

Thanks

Remember AM2 uses DDR2 memory so take that into account as well as the C2D does. It's really up to you, but I will say this... the motherboards for overclocking the C2D are almost $100 more expensive than a good AM2 motherboard that can overclock well. That alone makes me frown on the C2D at the moment. (note the Intel motherboard isn't in stock)

For instance http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131011
vs http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131025

Go ahead and ignore the $150 Giga-byte 965 board thats hitting 400 stock or 500 modded.

 

[MrUniq]

I would say conroe is worth the wait for a more reasonably priced MB...don't let the etailers gouge you. I have 4600 myself..but only b/c i already invested in 939. You may even want to think of a 'placeholder' MB in the meantime eh?

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: dexvx

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: Com80787
Well I've done my pricing today. The two possible rig options I have that almost max out my cash are either the Core 2 6300 or X2 4600. Both should be far better than my old Athlon 64 2800 socket 754 chip.

I've been reading the benchmarks and it looks like both the X2 4600 and Core 2 6300 are neck and neck for the most part. Can anyone advise me which would be the best choice of these two? I'm kind of torn between them. I won't be doing any overclocking.

Thanks

Remember AM2 uses DDR2 memory so take that into account as well as the C2D does. It's really up to you, but I will say this... the motherboards for overclocking the C2D are almost $100 more expensive than a good AM2 motherboard that can overclock well. That alone makes me frown on the C2D at the moment. (note the Intel motherboard isn't in stock)

For instance http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131011
vs http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131025

Go ahead and ignore the $150 Giga-byte 965 board thats hitting 400 stock or 500 modded.

A lot of people ignore 'facts'. Some are just fanboys.

Anyway, my view is that if you are not overclocking then AMD X2 or C2D doesn't really matter. But since overclocking the E6300 is so easy, it's probably worth it just in case you do get the guts to overclock in the future, when you find it's getting a bit slow.

Just a simple BIOS setting from 266FSB to 400FSB and your 1.83GHz C2D suddenly becomes a 2.8GHz speedster.

Most E6300s can do this on stock voltage too, so the stock HSF should be able to handle it OK. It's with the 3GHz+ overclocks and higher voltages where you need to consider aftermarket cooling.

 

[StrangerGuy]

I did 3.03GHz and 433MHz FSB with my E6300 and Gigabyte DS3 mobo on stock volts, and that's with the stock Intel HSF.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: dexvx

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: Com80787
Well I've done my pricing today. The two possible rig options I have that almost max out my cash are either the Core 2 6300 or X2 4600. Both should be far better than my old Athlon 64 2800 socket 754 chip.

I've been reading the benchmarks and it looks like both the X2 4600 and Core 2 6300 are neck and neck for the most part. Can anyone advise me which would be the best choice of these two? I'm kind of torn between them. I won't be doing any overclocking.

Thanks

Remember AM2 uses DDR2 memory so take that into account as well as the C2D does. It's really up to you, but I will say this... the motherboards for overclocking the C2D are almost $100 more expensive than a good AM2 motherboard that can overclock well. That alone makes me frown on the C2D at the moment. (note the Intel motherboard isn't in stock)

For instance http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131011
vs http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131025

Go ahead and ignore the $150 Giga-byte 965 board thats hitting 400 stock or 500 modded.

Guigabyte sucks IMO...I'll never buy any of their products ever. I've had such bad experience with them.

 

[bob661]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Go ahead and ignore the $150 Giga-byte 965 board thats hitting 400 stock or 500 modded.

Guigabyte sucks IMO...I'll never buy any of their products ever. I've had such bad experience with them.[/quote]

I've read that the Gigabtye DS3 is not really all it's cracked up to be. Just do a search here and a few other forums. Personally, I would wait till the NF500 boards come out or until a Conroe designed Intel board comes out.

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Guigabyte sucks IMO...I'll never buy any of their products ever. I've had such bad experience with them.

Each to their own I suppose. I've used a few Gigabyte boards over the years and they've all worked fine. They must've done something right with the DS3 considering it's so popular.

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: bob661

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Go ahead and ignore the $150 Giga-byte 965 board thats hitting 400 stock or 500 modded.

Guigabyte sucks IMO...I'll never buy any of their products ever. I've had such bad experience with them.

I've read that the Gigabtye DS3 is not really all it's cracked up to be. Just do a search here and a few other forums. Personally, I would wait till the NF500 boards come out or until a Conroe designed Intel board comes out.[/quote]


It's not the most feature rich board but it seems to be the best for E6300/E6400 overclocking.

It has some problems with RAM that defaults to 2.0V+ for booting I think.