Is there a big difference between core 2 duo E6400 and E6600?

Question

Cuz the E6400 is at least 100$ cheaper then E6600.My question is....is the extra 100+$ worth for E6600?which processor should i get?

Answer 1

At 2.13GHz, the E6400 is pretty fast. The problem is, many games and programs don't run on two cores simultaneously. For example, you will have troubles running Rainbow Six: Vegas, because it recommends you have at least 3GHz speed. Then again, many gamers recommend the E6400 over the E6600 because you can overclock each core to 3.0GHz with no stability problems.

The 0.3GHz speed difference to each core is sometimes worth it for people who want to overclock the extra 0.5GHz on each core, but for those not needing the extra bit of drive and who are on a budget, the E6400 is good enough.

I have an E6600 overclocked to 3.0GHz and a friend of mine has an E6400 overclocked to 3.0GHz. We play the same games and use the same programs and notice no real difference. So for those who say double the cache makes a difference, I highly doubt you'll notice.

Answer 2

Yes , the E6400 has a slower speed, and it has only 2MB of shared cache, compared to 4MB for the E6600.

If you do a lot of video editing get the E6600.
If not get the E6400.

Answer 3

The main difference is the SPEED of the processor...

the E6400 runs at 2.13 GHZ
the E6600 runs at 2.4 GHZ

The E6600 will be slightly faster and be able to handle more.

Answer 4

There are two difference really, the 6400 uses the Allendale core while the 6600 uses the Conroe core and the 6600 has double the amount of L2 cache at 4mb shared which will make it better at encoding. If you are on a budget then the 6400 is just fine. Core 2 Duos are very powerful processors. I have a 6300 and love it.

Answer 5

nicely, for sure the duo processor (2 brains) certainly, could be a effective equipment to bypass with yet once you're loopy approximately overall performance bypass with the two.a million or you are going to be able to remorseful approximately it later? :)