So to sum up my understanding of Core2 and mobos...

[BoboKatt]

Ok from the MONTHS of reading about the Core2 and all its flavours... am I right in these assumptions:

1) I should stick to an e6600 as it has a higher natural multiplier for OC'ing. This gives me the benefit of NOT having to try insane FSB speeds to get 3.0GHz and thus I can get a mobo that can be cheaper as it does not need to reach really high FSB. For instance (9X330 to get around 3Ghz rather than 7X440-- 330 is not a huge stretch for most boards... I hope).

2) If I stick with the e6600, again due to the high multiplier and lower FSB to reach 3.0Ghz in Oc'ing... I can use cheaper RAM that does not require to run a 1:1 at like 400Mhz or higher like 500!

3) Oc'ing is a crapshoot and my mileage may vary and I?ll probably run into lots of fun problems that will only increase my current hair loss

Hence why would anyone save say $100 by getting the e6300 but then have to spend a boatload on amazing RAM and an expensive mobo since they need to REALLY OC that FSB to reach 3+GHZ? Why not just spend $100 more on the e6600 to start with and save on everything else and probably, maybe, most likely reach 3Ghz easy on cheaper components?

Am I crazy? what am I missing as I am about to order today.

Thanks
Bob

 

[Avalon]

Well if you only want to hit 3Ghz, the E6400 would be more than capable (375x8) and wouldn't put any FSB strain on the motherboard at that speed. Any good P965 overclocking board would be capable of that, as well as DDR2-667 or DDR2-800 RAM.

But if you want to go higher, and want to be safe...then yes, the E6600 would be a good bet.

 

[Markfw]

Well, first off, the difference is $150. Second, the ram difference may not be that high, but in general, based on my experience, the 6600 is a good way to go, or at LEAST the 6400.

 

[Skott]

I agree with the others here. Take the P5W DH mobo for example. It'll allow 333fsb easy without an adjustment as far as voltage increases go. Couple that with a E6600 and you got a guranteed 3.0 Ghz assuming the mobo isnt bad upon arrival. Which it shouldnt be. Then all you need is decent RAM and a decent aftermarket hsf to cool it all. We'll assume the psu can handle it too. You could get a nice low priced quality hsf like the Freezer 7 Pro just to keep costs down and still give good performance. This what I would call a 'safe overclock' if such a thing can be said. Now if if you want to use a different mobo or a different processor and go above 3.0GHz then this picture could change as far as what you'll need to do it. It can be done. You just gotta plan it properly is all.

 

[BoboKatt]

Great stuff folks. Yup I left the PWS out as it's a brand new Seasonic 600 W which I made sure was a decent PWS.

What I have been noticing and one of the posters mentioned, is that the dif right now between most DDR2 rams is rather small as all prices have gone up for all speeds. Thus whether I like it or not I will pay lots for 2 X 1024 RAM. I thought I could save large by say getting 667 vs 800 but it looks like I wont save much.

And yes... $150 diff between say the e6300 and e6600... my bad as I just checked the latest of the late and noted that.

Well looks like it's the Giga DS3 (it's available locally and it "cheaper" than a 975 chipset mobo and a e6600 and whatever 667 chea DDR2 RAM I can find.

 

[aweigh]

What about OC'ing a 6400 with DDR1 RAM? The C2D mobo I'm planning on buying supports both types of DDR and I want to migrate my 2GB's of DDR1.

 

[88NovaTwincam]

Hmmm Never condsidered the e6600/e6400 at all but they are *only 310ish/220ish

In terms of RAW O/C capability are the 6300 and 6400 identical or does binning come into play?
This assuming i have dd2 capable of 440+ (which is easy to find) and a nice p965 mobo p5b-e, p5b-deluxe, or ds3

I don't need to go over 3.3GHz either but really how much can you save on 2X1GB of value/Quality ram? vs. say $230 on something that'll go 800MHz++

personally i was gonna go e6300 and nice dd2 (i enjoyed the subtle latency benefints from my CH-5 DDR1 939 so i'm assuming LL DD2 will feel snappier too)
my budget goal is to come as close to $500 as possible with a $600 roof for cpu,ddr2 and mobo

 

[88NovaTwincam]

Aweigh! I looked into that ECS conversion board and read some useful tips here on AT.. Seemed to be some happy users that were
able to go C2D CHEAP! Some of the stuff I read turned me off to the whole idea and I found a way to sell off my 05 era rig anyways..

Report back your findings!!

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: 88NovaTwincam
...(i enjoyed the subtle latency benefints from my CH-5 DDR1 939 so i'm assuming LL DD2 will feel snappier too)...

Not per say.

Though RAM performance differences are relatively minimal, higher bandwidth > timings pretty much in all cases for C2D.

I can use my system as an example for this:

3.400 GHz (8x425) w/ RAM @ DDR2-1063 5-5-5-10 (4:5 divider)
always beats
3.400 GHz (8x425) w/ RAM @ DDR2-850 4-4-4-10
however, both those configs are beaten by
3.402 GHz (7x486) w/ RAM @ DDR2-972 4-4-4-10

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: BoboKatt
Ok from the MONTHS of reading about the Core2 and all its flavours... am I right in these assumptions:

1) I should stick to an e6600 as it has a higher natural multiplier for OC'ing. This gives me the benefit of NOT having to try insane FSB speeds to get 3.0GHz and thus I can get a mobo that can be cheaper as it does not need to reach really high FSB. For instance (9X330 to get around 3Ghz rather than 7X440-- 330 is not a huge stretch for most boards... I hope).

2) If I stick with the e6600, again due to the high multiplier and lower FSB to reach 3.0Ghz in Oc'ing... I can use cheaper RAM that does not require to run a 1:1 at like 400Mhz or higher like 500!

3) Oc'ing is a crapshoot and my mileage may vary and I?ll probably run into lots of fun problems that will only increase my current hair loss

Hence why would anyone save say $100 by getting the e6300 but then have to spend a boatload on amazing RAM and an expensive mobo since they need to REALLY OC that FSB to reach 3+GHZ? Why not just spend $100 more on the e6600 to start with and save on everything else and probably, maybe, most likely reach 3Ghz easy on cheaper components?

Am I crazy? what am I missing as I am about to order today.

Thanks
Bob

E6600 usually needs higher volts to clock up past 3.2Ghz (higher than many E6400s), and usually runs at a higher temp than an E6400 at the same speed. Could be the extra cache.

 

[msi1337]

get an e6400...love mine and it will run 3ghz at just slightly above normal core voltage... it is up to 3.4ghz stable, but I choose to run it slower

 

[sanitydc]

Originally posted by: BoboKatt
Ok from the MONTHS of reading about the Core2 and all its flavours... am I right in these assumptions:

1) I should stick to an e6600 as it has a higher natural multiplier for OC'ing. This gives me the benefit of NOT having to try insane FSB speeds to get 3.0GHz and thus I can get a mobo that can be cheaper as it does not need to reach really high FSB. For instance (9X330 to get around 3Ghz rather than 7X440-- 330 is not a huge stretch for most boards... I hope).

2) If I stick with the e6600, again due to the high multiplier and lower FSB to reach 3.0Ghz in Oc'ing... I can use cheaper RAM that does not require to run a 1:1 at like 400Mhz or higher like 500!

3) Oc'ing is a crapshoot and my mileage may vary and I?ll probably run into lots of fun problems that will only increase my current hair loss

Hence why would anyone save say $100 by getting the e6300 but then have to spend a boatload on amazing RAM and an expensive mobo since they need to REALLY OC that FSB to reach 3+GHZ? Why not just spend $100 more on the e6600 to start with and save on everything else and probably, maybe, most likely reach 3Ghz easy on cheaper components?

Am I crazy? what am I missing as I am about to order today.

Thanks
Bob

I got my ram for 140 and my mobo for 150, what's so expensive about that? oh yeah I oc better than most e6600's as the retail ones don't oc well without exotic cooling. :]

 

[uOpt]

I agree with the original points.

However, that requirement to run RAM 1:1 for best results is a myth, at least as far as mprime/game stable overclocks are concerned. Running a divider does not force you to lower you CPU clock, and the slightly slower RAM has almost no effect on performance.

The 6600 is it worth for the multiplier, though. Remember it is only 9 as the base FSB on the boards is already high. This is not the 939 world where you could go from 200 to 300 (= 50% overclock) easily.

 

[The-Noid]

For my system 1:1 is more stable than running 4:5 and I hardly lose out on the bandwidth. I get about 8600 in Sisoft Sandra with 3-3-3-8 @ 430 mhz and about 8700 @ 540 4-4-4-4. I do pick up a bit in stability and I don't like to put 1.8+v on Northbridge all the time to keep that ratio. I would never recommend anyone get less than DDR667 or run less than 1:1 as you lose out quite a bit on that.