X2 5200+ or E6600

[Baez]

Yes, that would explain why they make all the chips the same, because 1 fab is cheaper than 2. But why disable the L2 cache? That just makes the chips perform slower. They are going to cost the same for them to manufacture either way, the only difference is that they disable 2mb of cache. That's more trouble than just leaving it and setting the multipler and clock, which they have to do anyway.

Man have you listened to me at all? I've been saying it's so that the e6600 and 6700 look more powerful compared to the "allendale" chips. They make more of a profit off of the higher end chips so making the higher end chips look more powerful causes people to buy those. Hence Intel makes more than if they only had a different multiplier.

 

[gmanych]

So if you enable the extra 2mb cache and overclocked the E6300 it could be like a X6800?

 

[Lord AnthraX]

No because the Multi limits the E6300 to like 3.7 3.8 MAX while the x6800 Can reach MUCH higher.

 

[gmanych]

But if you could unlock the multi in e6300

 

[Lord AnthraX]

You cant though...

 

[Waphlez]

No because the Multi limits the E6300 to like 3.7 3.8 MAX while the x6800 Can reach MUCH higher.

I think he meant it being like a stock X6800, and if it can't have 4MB cache then it won't ever to be like a X6800.

 

[Lord AnthraX]

I think he meant it being like a stock X6800, and if it can't have 4MB cache then it won't ever to be like a X6800.

Ah I see.

 

[Baez]

Ya it's not possible unless someone figures an EASY way of enabling the extra 2 megs

 

[gmanych]

ah ok. but can a E6600 be like a X6800?

 

[Baez]

if you bring the x6800's multiplier down by 2 then yes. but x6800 will be able to clock higher than the e6600 anytime if they stay at their stock multipliers