Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 5:58 am Post subject: 4300 vs 4400
Hi!
Just a quick q. I see a lot mentioned about the 4300 beeinga desent Ocer
and good price/performance. How about the 4400? It's very little difference
in price, should one still go for the 4300??
Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 5:58 am Post subject: Re: 4300 vs 4400
'Thomas Andersson' wrote:
| Just a quick q. I see a lot mentioned about the 4300 beeinga desent Ocer
| and good price/performance. How about the 4400? It's very little
difference
| in price, should one still go for the 4300??
_____
Be the first on your block to know! The E4400 is just out.
The E4400 price seems to be $26 US higher than the E4300 price. Overclocked
performance should be about the same. The price differential slope is
slippery; another $26 US gets you the E6320 with twice the L2 cache and
likely the same top overclocked speed IF you can get the required high FSB
speed.
At the moment I think the overclocking bang for buck choice is between the
E4300 at $118 US and the E6600 at $232 US.
The E6600 has a higher multiplier than the lower numbered E6XXX series CPUs
and can reach mid 3 GHz overclock speeds more easily. The overclocked CPU
speeds for the E4300, E4400, and E6600 will be comparable. The E6600 has
the advantage of a 4 MByte L2 cache; twice the L2 cache size of the E4xxx
series.
Phil Weldon
"Thomas Andersson" <thomas@tifozi.net> wrote in message
news:59dcavF2kc20nU1@mid.individual.net...
| Hi!
|
| Just a quick q. I see a lot mentioned about the 4300 beeinga desent Ocer
| and good price/performance. How about the 4400? It's very little
difference
| in price, should one still go for the 4300??
|
| Best Wishes
| Thomas
|
|
Watched Topics
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Profile
Log in
Memberlist
Usergroups