X2 5200+ or E6600

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

well it wouldn't make sense if Intel didn't make some differentiations. they need lower models that perform less so they can sell them cheaper. they wouldn't be able to sell higher models if the lower models weren't crippled, seeing as low end models are cheaper

there is also the fact that many e6300 and e6400 cores are probably faulty i.e defective cache or failed speed binning at higher levels. Intel would have locked the defective cache by severing some trace and underclocked it so it was still functional and sellable.
if it were possible (as far as i know it's not) to unlock the cache, it wouldn't do much good because it's probably faulty.

as for Russian weapons, how about Kalashnikov's genius :D
 
If you overclock E6600 to 2.93Ghz, it will be faster than X6800.

Because when you overclock E6600 it will have higher FSB speed than X6800
 
If you overclock E6600 to 2.93Ghz, it will be faster than X6800.

Because when you overclock E6600 it will have higher FSB speed than X6800

i'm putting a gold star next to your name on the roll call :D. that's correct, the higher FSB and memory bandwidth (if memory is overclocked too) means that the e6600 clocked at the same speed as an x6800 will most likely out perform it.
 
Are you joking??? The Core 2 Duo's are the best overclockers the world has ever seen. Some have been able to double the speed. That has never been obtainable until now.
 
So an overclocked E6600 can beat the X6800 by a Long way if the X6800 wasnt overclocked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom