E2140, 2160 and 2180?

[mjavid]

Since the price is more or less the same, which has the maximum overclock potential and why?

Thanks,

M Javid

 

[myocardia]

I'd say the 2180, for two reasons. First, it came from the same piece of silicon as the other two, yet tested higher when Intel tested it. And probably more importantly, it has a higher multiplier, which means that both your motherboard and RAM won't have to clock as high, to reach the same cpu speed.

 

[mjavid]

Originally posted by: myocardia
.....it has a higher multiplier, which means that both your motherboard and RAM won't have to clock as high, to reach the same cpu speed....

Does'nt this mean that it is already somewhat overclocked?

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: mjavid
Does'nt this mean that it is already somewhat overclocked?

No, it means that it ran faster on the same vcore, or ran at xxxx Mhz with less vcore. Of course, you can nearly always get a lower speed chip to overclock as high as the faster ones, but it almost always requires more vcore, which makes it run hotter, as well as not making it last as long.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

E2140, E2160, and E2180 are basically the same chip. All will hit +2.2GHz at stock voltage, therefore, I'm not aware of any speed binning by Intel. Look at the E21x0 overclock post. Plenty of +3.2GHz overclocks.

I would stay away from E2140 due to the 8x multiplier. Too much demand on CPU, RAM, and MB to hit 3.2-3.4GHz range. The 9x multi E2160 is more than adequate to hit 3.6GHz with $9/GB HP DDR2 667 RAMs.

 

[jjmIII]

It's funny, I like the e2140 the most.

It's the cheapest and you only need DDR800 to take it to 3.2Ghz, and then it is running 1:1 with your ram. As far as stressing the mobo.....I use an Abit IP35-E, which 'Serp' himself will tell you is capable of 500+ mhz front side bus.

O' ya....and it's the cheapest. Or did I say that already .

 

[johnnyjohnson]

From anecdotal evidence I've seen, the e2180 is the best overclocker of the bunch and the e2140 is the worst, statistically speaking. It doesn't matter what the reasons are, that's just the way it is. I would recommend anyone looking at the e2xxx series to go for the e2180.

 

[Tullphan]

I've seen these for sale at a vendor...what's the difference (besides the obvious) & which would be the better buy?
1.) E2180 BX80557E2180SLA8Y $90
2.) E2160 BX80557E2160SLA3H $81
3.) E2160 HH80557PG0331MSLA3h $71

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Originally posted by: johnnyjohnson
From anecdotal evidence I've seen, the e2180 is the best overclocker of the bunch and the e2140 is the worst, statistically speaking. It doesn't matter what the reasons are, that's just the way it is. I would recommend anyone looking at the e2xxx series to go for the e2180.

All are based on the same platform. Nominal overclock is 3.2-3.4GHz. It takes a good MB and RAMs (+440MHz FSB) to get E2140 north of 3.5GHz. Same rig with E2160 will only need about 390MHz FSB.

The 800MHz CPUs also tend to top out around 425MHz FSB. Therefore, it may be difficult for E2140 to break 3.4GHz.

 

[clickynext]

If you're going for overclock, get the 2180 since you're guaranteed the M0 stepping. I got a 2140 L2 stepping and it refuses to go above 2.8 (already decent, but you'd probably want higher).

 

[Tullphan]

I can get an E2180 w/M0 steppings for $85 shipped (brand new). Is that a good deal?

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Warm deal. I paid $75 for E4300/E4400 @ the B&M Frys (clearance).

 

[Tullphan]

That's my problem...no B&M Frys (or CC or BB) near me.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

E2160 should be able to achieve the same level of overclock.

 

[jcenters]

With such a small price difference between the 2160 and 2180, I don't see why anyone gets the former. The real battle is between the 2140 and the 2180 imo.

Overall, I think the 2180 is the more economical option. Sure, you pay about $20 more, but with the higher multiplier, you can get away with slower memory. Considering that you can pick up quality 667 for $10 a stick, I'd say it's an easy choice.

The 2180 (In theory) should easily be able to hit 3.33 at 10x333 for a 1:1 ratio.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Quality 1.8V DDR2 667 RAMs should be able to hit 400MHz with 2.0V/5-5-5-15-2T. Therefore, 2160 with 9x multi can theoretically hit 3.6GHz overclock. Why pay an extra $20 for a 10x multi chip?

 

[JackMDS]

Let say I got a mobo that for what ever reason was born Unstable above 320MHz.

Would not the End Result of x10 get better than x9 (2.88 vs 3.2).

 

[SerpentRoyal]

sure...but the majority of P965s should be able to hit 350MHz FSB with ease.

Pin mod will also work with quite a few DELL and ECS boards (zero to little overclocking capability).

 

[jcenters]

Serpent,

Yeah, but if you're pushing the CPU that high, you're moving into aftermarket cooling territory. That's fine if you can get a great deal on a cooler. Otherwise not.

Jack,

Yes, you'd be better with the higher multiplier. But I think at that point, you might consider a new board.

 

[JackMDS]

Do the fair answer would be.

Since the majority of P965s hit 350MHz then x9 would be a good choice.

However if you end up with a Mobo that end up topping at a lower FSB x10 would provide better outcome.

----------------------------------------------------
As an example, I have a Gigabyte Mobo that locks above 280MHz.

With 2160 I get 2.5GHz with 2180 I get 2.8GHz.

Now comes the personal (none technology) call. I paid $20 more to get 2.8GHz.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Originally posted by: jcenters
Serpent,

Yeah, but if you're pushing the CPU that high, you're moving into aftermarket cooling territory. That's fine if you can get a great deal on a cooler. Otherwise not.

Jack,

Yes, you'd be better with the higher multiplier. But I think at that point, you might consider a new board.

The Cooler Master TX2 was FREE AR last week. Cooling preformance is 3 to 4C hotter than the Big Typhoon. 9x vs 11x multi should not elevate core temp by 1 or 2C (worst case). The major component that affect CPU temp is Vcore.

If you can't overclock your board above 280MHz FSB, then it's best to use the pin mod (266 or 333 @ default settings). You should also be able to locate a new $30-$40 ECS on Fleabay (+300MHz FSB).

 

[jcenters]

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
Quality 1.8V DDR2 667 RAMs should be able to hit 400MHz with 2.0V/5-5-5-15-2T. Therefore, 2160 with 9x multi can theoretically hit 3.6GHz overclock. Why pay an extra $20 for a 10x multi chip?

Also, that's the wrong comparison. The difference between the E2140 and the E2180 is about $20. However, the difference between the 2160 and the 2180 is $9.

Personally, I think the $9 is worth the extra multiplier.

 

[jcenters]

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
The Cooler Master TX2 was FREE AR last week. Cooling preformance is 3 to 4C hotter than the Big Typhoon. 9x vs 11x multi should not elevate core temp by 1 or 2C (worst case). The major component that affect CPU temp is Vcore.

Yes, but won't you have to raise Vcore to get it stable at 3.66?

 

[SerpentRoyal]

If you have okay board and RAMs, then the higher FSB speed of a 9x multi CPU will yield a very small improvement in system performance...plus you'll save $9.

I'd take 378MHz FSB @ 3.4GHz any day over 340MHz FSB @ 3.4GHz.

 

[SerpentRoyal]

Originally posted by: jcenters

Originally posted by: SerpentRoyal
The Cooler Master TX2 was FREE AR last week. Cooling preformance is 3 to 4C hotter than the Big Typhoon. 9x vs 11x multi should not elevate core temp by 1 or 2C (worst case). The major component that affect CPU temp is Vcore.

Yes, but won't you have to raise Vcore to get it stable at 3.66?

Most of these chips will top out around 3.5GHz. Stock cooler is good up to about 3.0GHz. The TX2 could handle up to about 3.3GHz if there is sufficient air flow inside the case.