Madshrimps Forum Madness

Madshrimps Forum Madness (http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/)
-   Articles & Howto's (http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f6/)
-   -   Intel Core 2 Duo E2160 vs E6300: Budget CPU Comparison (http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f6/intel-core-2-duo-e2160-vs-e6300-budget-cpu-comparison-36303/)

jmke 10th August 2007 14:13

Intel Core 2 Duo E2160 vs E6300: Budget CPU Comparison
 
Last year Intel gave us the Core 2 Duo, a competitively priced CPU with very acceptable prices for the low and mid-range. This year Intel introduced newer models from low to high end, we take a look at the new low priced E2160 model which has less L2 cache but higher multiplier and compare it with the low end part from last year, the E6300.

http://www.madshrimps.be/gotoartik.php?articID=603

Sidney 10th August 2007 14:29

For normal office apps and occasional gamers E2160 should do just fine with less heat. Nicely done, Massman :)

jmke 10th August 2007 14:39

For cheaper thrills, E2140 will even suffice. Would not go lower, you'll loose 64-bit compatibility, and might come in handy... one day

Rutar 10th August 2007 14:58

Even for a budget system, it was too GPU limited for my taste.



the HL2 engine is usually also a nice bench to run

Sidney 10th August 2007 15:00

Quote:

Budget CPU Comparison
No where does it say budget system, does it? :)

jmke 10th August 2007 15:02

It's a CPU comparo:)
GPU that was available by the test was used

my current recommendation for budget GPU would be 8600GT at €99

Rutar 10th August 2007 15:14

yes but the CPUs couldn't be properly tested because the FPS were limited by the GPU


I wonder how Intel makes those CPUs, are they ones that have a partially damaged cache or a specific budget design?

jmke 10th August 2007 15:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rutar (Post 151821)
yes but the CPUs couldn't be properly tested because the FPS were limited by the GPU

you want resolutions lower than 640x480 to proof what point? :)

Games are not CPU dependent except for a few games where it's kinda more important, but still GPU mainly deciding how much FPS you get.

With a faster video card we would still have tested at higher resolution, to make it "real world";

HL2 engine might react well with CPU power, but it's worthless in my humble opinion to know if HL2 runs at 150fps vs 160fps, if at higher IQ and resolution, with GPU bottleneck both systems run at 51 vs 52FPS.

thorgal 10th August 2007 15:36

Nice 1, Massie ! Quite impressive for a first review :woot:

Zenphic 11th August 2007 05:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmke (Post 151817)
For cheaper thrills, E2140 will even suffice. Would not go lower, you'll loose 64-bit compatibility, and might come in handy... one day

The E2140 seems to get stuck at ~2.8 Ghz in overclocking though. Still decent, but for a dozen dollars more you can get more overclocking funness :love:

Very nice review too, I've been looking for more comparison reviews with the E2160.
It might have been interesting to add a AMD processor in the test too ;)


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:36.

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO