# Trade intel CPU's??



## 87dtna (Aug 23, 2009)

Anybody a non-overclocker out there that owns an E5200, I'd like to trade you my E6300 wolfdale CPU straight up.  The E6300 is 2.8ghz and has a 1066 front side bus speed, so thats a 300mhz clock speed upgrade and 266mhz increase in the front side bus for you for the price of shipping the chip ($5-10).  Everything else about them is exactly the same....socket lga 775, power usage (65w), cache size(2mb), etc.

If you want to compare, here's the links-

E6300-

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116091

E5200-

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116072

If you are worried that I've abused this E6300, don't worry.  I've only owned it for a few weeks now, and it's not my everyday rig.  In fact it hasn't even been started up within the last week.  I've never pushed voltage past 1.50v, it currently runs at 1.425 at 3.4 ghz and never exceeds 60 degrees celsius CORE temp (cpu temp ~10 degrees lower)


----------



## lovely? (Aug 25, 2009)

y the trade? sorry i dont have one but it would seem like your downgrading?


----------



## linkin (Aug 25, 2009)

The E5200 is a Pentium Dual Core, which is just a rebadged Core 2 Duo with a different clockspeed. I'm guessing he wants to trade because the E5200 can overclock further than the E6300.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 25, 2009)

lovely? said:


> y the trade? sorry i dont have one but it would seem like your downgrading?



The E5200 has a much higher multiplier of 12, the E6300 is only 10.  That makes for higher clock speeds with lower front side bus = easier overclocking


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 25, 2009)

linkin93 said:


> The E5200 is a Pentium Dual Core, which is just a rebadged Core 2 Duo with a different clockspeed. I'm guessing he wants to trade because the E5200 can overclock further than the E6300.



Yup, the E6300 is also a rebadged C2D.


----------



## PabloTeK (Aug 25, 2009)

87dtna said:


> Yup, the E6300 is also a rebadged C2D.


It *is* a C2D, one the the originals!


----------



## bomberboysk (Aug 25, 2009)

87dtna said:


> Yup, the E6300 is also a rebadged C2D.


It has less cache, and is binned lower than a c2d so theres no guarantee it will overclock further.


----------



## Russian777 (Aug 25, 2009)

bomberboysk said:


> It has less cache, and is binned lower than a c2d so theres no guarantee it will overclock further.



Dual Core And Core 2 duo's are 2 different things. No one rebagged anything.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 25, 2009)

Russian777 said:


> Dual Core And Core 2 duo's are 2 different things. No one rebagged anything.



The E5200 and E6300 are both wolfdale cores.  Thats core 2 duo.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 25, 2009)

PabloTeK said:


> It *is* a C2D, one the the originals!



There are 2 E6300's.  One is the old one you are referring to and it was like 1.86ghz or something like that.  This is the NEW E6300, it's clocked at 2.8ghz stock speed.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 25, 2009)

bomberboysk said:


> It has less cache, and is binned lower than a c2d so theres no guarantee it will overclock further.



It's my motherboard being the cork not the CPU.  My motherboard doesn't like such high front side bus.  If I got a better motherboard that supported higher FSB this CPU would overclock easily to 3.8ghz or more.  With this setup, 3.8ghz is bootable, but not stable.  With the E5200, the FSB will be considerably lower at the same clock speed because of the higher multiplier.  Therefore, it's cheaper to get an E5200 than it is a new motherboard, especially if I can trade straight up for one.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 25, 2009)

I just wanted to say, if anyone out there has an E5200 and is considering this, I'd be more than happy to remove the E6300 and snap a pic of it with a piece of paper with my username and all that jazz to prove it's mine.  No problem.


----------



## just a noob (Aug 25, 2009)

i'm sorry to say, but e5200's have a fairly low fsb wall as well, mine wouldn't boot at anything over 335 fsb with the 12.5 multi, the most stable fsb i ran at was 300 fsb, and that was on my p45 chipset


----------



## bomberboysk (Aug 25, 2009)

87dtna said:


> It's my motherboard being the cork not the CPU.  My motherboard doesn't like such high front side bus.  If I got a better motherboard that supported higher FSB this CPU would overclock easily to 3.8ghz or more.  With this setup, 3.8ghz is bootable, but not stable.  With the E5200, the FSB will be considerably lower at the same clock speed because of the higher multiplier.  Therefore, it's cheaper to get an E5200 than it is a new motherboard, especially if I can trade straight up for one.


e5200's hit overclocking walls, because they are lower binned chips for a reason.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 25, 2009)

The higher multiplier still makes it a better overclocker.  Right now I have my FSB of my E6300 at 325, and with a multiplier at 10.5 that is 3.4ghz.  Even if an E5200 can only get 300 FSB with a 12.5 multiplier thats 3.75ghz.  I've seen a lot of reviews of 4.0ghz with an E5200.  That only takes 320 FSB with an E5200.  It takes 380 FSB to do it with an E6300.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 25, 2009)

If anybody wants to buy my E6300, I'll sell it outright for $55 shipped and just put it toward an E5200.


----------



## Springy182 (Aug 27, 2009)

87dtna said:


> There are 2 E6300's.  One is the old one you are referring to and it was like 1.86ghz or something like that.  This is the NEW E6300, it's clocked at 2.8ghz stock speed.



You're incorrect, why would Intel use the same model number for two different processors?

You could be thinking of an E8300 which is 2833MHz, or an E7400 at 2800MHz, but there is no such thing as an E6300 that runs 2800MHz at stock.


----------



## just a noob (Aug 27, 2009)

Springy182 said:


> You're incorrect, why would Intel use the same model number for two different processors?
> 
> You could be thinking of an E8300 which is 2833MHz, or an E7400 at 2800MHz, but there is no such thing as an E6300 that runs 2800MHz at stock.



do some research before you call others out: e6300 wolfdale


----------



## Springy182 (Aug 27, 2009)

just a noob said:


> do some research before you call others out: e6300 wolfdale



The way he was saying this he implied C2D not Pentium DC, specificially when he stated



87dtna said:


> There are 2 E6300's.  One is the old one you are referring to and it was like 1.86ghz or something like that.  This is the NEW E6300, it's clocked at 2.8ghz stock speed.



after someone else stated



PabloTeK said:


> It *is* a C2D, one the the originals!



Especially considering the PDC E6300 was released just a few months ago to little fanfare, I made a minor mistake by assuming he meant C2D E6300 from his somewhat vague statement, points for jumping on me over it.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 27, 2009)

I don't understand the confusion, or what your problem is Springy182.  The new E6300 PDC is in fact a core 2 duo clocked at 2.8ghz, as I've said from the beginning.  All PDC's currently for sale are rebadged core 2 duo's, with slightly less cache.  Just because you didn't know there are 2 different E6300's is not my problem.
If you look at benchmarks between the E6300 and E7400 they are nearly identical.  Plus, the E7400 does not do XP virtualization in windows 7, the new E6300 does.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 27, 2009)

Springy182 said:


> after someone else stated




Read posts 9 and 10 by me, no one else stated the differences between the old and new E6300 before me.


----------



## Springy182 (Aug 27, 2009)

87dtna said:


> I don't understand the confusion, or what your problem is Springy182.  The new E6300 PDC is in fact a core 2 duo clocked at 2.8ghz, as I've said from the beginning.  All PDC's currently for sale are rebadged core 2 duo's, with slightly less cache.  Just because you didn't know there are 2 different E6300's is not my problem.
> If you look at benchmarks between the E6300 and E7400 they are nearly identical.  Plus, the E7400 does not do XP virtualization in windows 7, the new E6300 does.



I have no problem 87dtna, I was pointing out what I thought was a mistake, and then just_a_noob jumps on me over it, yes PDC is the same architecture but generally Intel doesnt recycle model numbers. Yeah but you could run VMware on a P4, you dont neccessarily need VT

ETA: And really, you two seem to be the ones with problems, I thought I was correcting a small mistake you made, and then you both jump on me over it, woo really must make you feel good, winning arguements on the internet.


----------



## just a noob (Aug 27, 2009)

the e5200 should be shipped out today, i'll see if i can get you a tracking number tonight


----------



## Springy182 (Aug 27, 2009)

87dtna said:


> Read posts 9 and 10 by me, no one else stated the differences between the old and new E6300 before me.



You never stated it was Pentium Dual Core, you said "Thats core 2 duo"

You never stated you had a -Pentium Dual Core- 6300 before I posted, you simply said E6300


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 27, 2009)

Springy182 said:


> You never stated it was Pentium Dual Core, you said "Thats core 2 duo"
> 
> You never stated you had a -Pentium Dual Core- 6300 before I posted, you simply said E6300



LOL, what?  It's not a ''-Pentium Dual Core- 6300'', it is a ''Pentium E6300'', officially.  Did you not read the link the other user posted?  Intel still puts the E in there because it really is a core 2 duo, it's only because it has 2mb cache instead of 3 is why they label it dual core instead of C2D.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 27, 2009)

just a noob said:


> the e5200 should be shipped out today, i'll see if i can get you a tracking number tonight



Cool, thanks.


----------



## Springy182 (Aug 28, 2009)

87dtna said:


> LOL, what?  It's not a ''-Pentium Dual Core- 6300'', it is a ''Pentium E6300'', officially.  Did you not read the link the other user posted?  Intel still puts the E in there because it really is a core 2 duo, it's only because it has 2mb cache instead of 3 is why they label it dual core instead of C2D.



When they reduce the cache they call it something else, like Q8400 Q9400 and Q9450, and guess what? it's still not branded as Core 2 Duo so what I said stands, Wikipedia puts it in the same section as Pentium Dual Core not Core 2 Duo

I dont really care about your semantics, I was trying to point out a mistake not start a flamewar, dont be so immature about it and stop trying to pick a fight.


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 28, 2009)

Springy182 said:


> When they reduce the cache they call it something else, like Q8400 Q9400 and Q9450, and guess what? it's still not branded as Core 2 Duo so what I said stands, Wikipedia puts it in the same section as Pentium Dual Core not Core 2 Duo
> 
> I dont really care about your semantics, I was trying to point out a mistake not start a flamewar, dont be so immature about it and stop trying to pick a fight.



It's a wolfdale core, thats core 2 duo....just like my gts250 video card is an overclocked 9800gtx.  They can slap a different name on it, but that doesn't take away from what it is.

There's a reason why college professor's and even high school teachers now do not accept wikipedia as a source.


----------



## Springy182 (Aug 28, 2009)

87dtna said:


> It's a wolfdale core, thats core 2 duo....just like my gts250 video card is an overclocked 9800gtx.  They can slap a different name on it, but that doesn't take away from what it is.
> 
> There's a reason why college professor's and even high school teachers now do not accept wikipedia as a source.



Actually the GTS 250 is a 9800GTX+ which was an overclocked 9800GTX, but that's besides the point...

It's not BRANDED as a Core 2 Duo, it's the same underlying architecture, that's what I've said several times now

Can you READ?..


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 28, 2009)

Springy182 said:


> Actually the GTS 250 is a 9800GTX+ which was an overclocked 9800GTX, but that's besides the point...
> .




Nope, it's not a + it's a straight GTX overclocked.  My gts250 is 65nm, and the larger 324 die size like the gtx.  The + is 55nm, and 230 die size.

Yes I can read, we are basically saying the same thing only in different words.  You are using ''branded'', I just said ''name''.  Same thing meant.


----------



## Springy182 (Aug 28, 2009)

87dtna said:


> Nope, it's not a + it's a straight GTX overclocked.  My gts250 is 65nm, and the larger 324 die size like the gtx.  The + is 55nm, and 230 die size.
> 
> Yes I can read, we are basically saying the same thing only in different words.  You are using ''branded'', I just said ''name''.  Same thing meant.



It's got the same clocks as the 9800GTX+ though, so some could be called 9800GTX and some GTX+, only real difference is the die shrink really

Yes same thing meant so pointless argument is pointless


----------



## 87dtna (Aug 28, 2009)

:good:


----------

