SPCR

I've just seen a review of the new Core 2 Duo model, the E4300 (9 x 200 MHz). It's not in English, but you can see that it draws 15 W less than a E6300 (7 x 266 MHz) in their tests. That's quite much for a small 66 Mhz difference, but remember that the mobo also draws less power because of the lowered FSB.

One of the reasons why the difference is so high could be because of the new L2 revision. We'll see if Intel have improved EIST as well. The power consumption in idle should be pretty low anyway since it runs at 1200 MHz and not 1600 MHz with EIST.

Shame I'm building in a week or so. If I was building in a few months I'd love to get this.

It won't be long until they show up, possibly January 6, but most likely January 21. Are you sure you can't wait?

It can't wait

If anyone find more reviews, please post the links here. I'd really like to see it running at 7 x 266 MHz and compared to the E6300.

A good thing with this one is that it's so easy to overclock 2400 MHz in any 266 MHz mobo, same speed as a E6600.

Very interested if it's power draw is really that low. If it was here at SPCR I'd believe it, some random website I never heard of.....

Most review sites should be able to use a Seasonic Power Angel and start up SP2004, but yeah, you never know...

So the lowest multiplier is still 6 and you get 4 speed steppings? Hum... and it'll be socket 775 compatible with the cpus that support the E6x00 core2? Man... now this is tempting. Depending on price. I don't know which system to sell now, my A64 x2 3800+ or the core2....

Ah but wait! I hope intel didn't lock the lower VIDs. If it bottoms out around 1.1V, i'm out.

Isn't the E4300 series the Solo series of Core 2? So they're the Core 2 Solo not Duo. Single cores to replace the current Pentium 4s.

Chocolinx wrote:Isn't the E4300 series the Solo series of Core 2? So they're the Core 2 Solo not Duo. Single cores to replace the current Pentium 4s.

No.

It looks like there is also an E2xxx series Core 2 Solo in the picture. Anyone seen anything new on either of these?

Daily Tech article from Dec 19.

Saw the article at anandtech today and it says it's locked at x9 multiplier. So no speed step, not a problem if you run it at stock speed but i'd like speedstep on an overclock to ramp things down when i don't need it to run fast.

I just read the article a few hours ago, and I don't remember reading that (though I did read it pretty quickly). Everything I've read so far on the E4300 seems to indicate it does have Speedstep.

Here's an X-bit Labs article that shows the only thing it's lacking is Intel VT (which was also mentioned in the anandtech article).

How does this compare to a 6300 when both are overclocked? I guess the 6300 would have it beat by a little? or would they be pretty similar? Wish they would start selling them at a decent price.

ZOMG, well if it does have speed step, i might be tempted to sell my 6300 and get one! It was just that anandtech said it had the multiplier locked at x9, but that was in context of overclocking so i suppose they meant 9x upward.

Yeah - I'm salivating. I was going to go with e6400, then I read the e4300 reviews on Xbit and Anandtech.
$166 Jan 21...$133 in Q2. Capable of massive overclocking w/o increasing cpu voltage.

wow.

I hear it should hit 2.7ghz at stock voltage without a hitch. Most of them start needing more voltage over 3Ghz.

Intel Core 2 Duo E4300: Affordable and Highly Overclockable
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sh ... spx?i=2903

Running my E6300 @ 1.35v @ 7x 466 = 3262 Mhz...

E4300 should be easier to overclock due to 9x instead of 7x (e6300) and 8x (6400)...

I'm not sure i understand how this thing will be EASIER to overclock. Tell me if i'm wrong:
Right now i have a very overclock unfriendly P5B-VM and doesn't overclock anywhere over 285MHz. If that limit is inherent to the motherboard (because i hear the e6300 goes way way over that) then with a higher multiplier, i don't have to raise the FSB as much to overclock?
Right now my e6300 maxes at 1995MHz, then i can expect the e4300 to go 2565MHz right?

Spare Tire wrote:I'm not sure i understand how this thing will be EASIER to overclock. Tell me if i'm wrong:
Right now i have a very overclock unfriendly P5B-VM and doesn't overclock anywhere over 285MHz. If that limit is inherent to the motherboard (because i hear the e6300 goes way way over that) then with a higher multiplier, i don't have to raise the FSB as much to overclock?
Right now my e6300 maxes at 1995MHz, then i can expect the e4300 to go 2565MHz right?

The higher the multiplier, the higher the OC will be @ the same FSB
Yes.

I'm more interested in undervolting, and it's SpeedStep capability. I just want decent performance without a lot of noise and thermal problems. This seems like a good chip on which to build a decent quiet desktop, WITHOUT having to resort to Merom and using odd-ball chipsets to get your laptop CPU recognized and similar contortions. I like the idea of the Merom, but the very limited choice of motherboards is a real problem.

IMO, overclocking is more at home over at the HARDOCP forums where they are all about lots of fans and painting flames down the side of the case.

I don't know about the e4300 but the e6300 doesn't undervolt anywhere below 1.162V, that is the VID doesn't go below. Unless you resort to pin modding, there's wasted potential there. So the only sensible thing to do is to OVERCLOCK IT until you use every volt to it's full potential, overclock it till it hits the stability limit of the 1.162V. Why would anyone leave it at stock speed when the undervolt just doesn't do it any justice.

Spare Tire wrote:I don't know about the e4300 but the e6300 doesn't undervolt anywhere below 1.162V, that is the VID doesn't go below. Unless you resort to pin modding, there's wasted potential there. So the only sensible thing to do is to OVERCLOCK IT until you use every volt to it's full potential, overclock it till it hits the stability limit of the 1.162V. Why would anyone leave it at stock speed when the undervolt just doesn't do it any justice.

I do not completely agree with you. It is true that voltage is the main factor in power consumption, but frequency affects too. In fact, it is considered that power consumption is proportional to V * V * f. Although it is smaller, power consumption is also reduced with lower frequency.

So I would use the lowest voltage possible at the lowest frequency possible (within a reasonable limit) for idle state. In idle state you usually don't need extra performance. And I would use the highest possible frequency at the maximun safe voltage for load state.

Even then, my e6300 runs at x7 (the max) with the lowest VID.

Just got one.

Using stock cooling, temp read using "core temp"

Slight overclock to 1979mhz (crap motherboard)

42c max load (2 x prime95)
25c idle.

I gotta say, those are fantastic temps; what's the ambient temp in Sydney right now? Low 20s?

Anyone know how high a e4300 will go on stock voltage?
And how high a e6300 can go on stock voltage?
Thats what I want to know, Highest stable overclock that I can comfortably leave going 24/7 for a few years.

jaganath wrote:I gotta say, those are fantastic temps; what's the ambient temp in Sydney right now? Low 20s?

21c at the moment.

Temps seem almost too good to be true don't they. I've taken the overclock off and it's 40c full load.

Maybe the temp monitor utilities haven't caught up yet? But it does "seem" to be cooler than my opty.

kogi

Sounds like a great chip for silence addicts, lower power consumption and highly overclockable.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sh ... i=2903&p=7