If that's the true, I may be getting an E8500 for my OC'ed gaming rig instead of an E8400.Most peeps think that the e8500 warrants a better OC with less volts, and except a few batches this seems to be true also...
E8500 cooler than E8400?
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
E8500 cooler than E8400?
Look at this thread over @ XS. Excerpt:
Re: E8500 cooler than E8400?
It ought to be with that vast difference in price. I still think though that the E8400 delivers most bang for your bucks.krille wrote:Look at this thread over @ XS. Excerpt:If that's the true, I may be getting an E8500 for my OC'ed gaming rig instead of an E8400.Most peeps think that the e8500 warrants a better OC with less volts, and except a few batches this seems to be true also...
Re: E8500 cooler than E8400?
Well of course it does.juamez wrote:It ought to be with that vast difference in price. I still think though that the E8400 delivers most bang for your bucks.krille wrote:Look at this thread over @ XS. Excerpt:If that's the true, I may be getting an E8500 for my OC'ed gaming rig instead of an E8400.Most peeps think that the e8500 warrants a better OC with less volts, and except a few batches this seems to be true also...
How much cooler would an E8500 run? Would the difference result in an audibly lower noise level (with a TRUE)?
If it would, I'm probably getting an E8500. Price difference isn't that big imo (both are cheap!).
E8500 and E8400 are the same processor. The only difference is the default multiplier.
That being said, all processors are different. Statisticly the E8500 should overclock a little better since it's guaranteed to work at a slightly higher clock than the E8400. But as the yield is getting better with time, the general difference should decline.
E8400 delivers most bang for your bucks, like juamez says.
That being said, all processors are different. Statisticly the E8500 should overclock a little better since it's guaranteed to work at a slightly higher clock than the E8400. But as the yield is getting better with time, the general difference should decline.
E8400 delivers most bang for your bucks, like juamez says.
There will be an E8600 coming out... http://www.tcmagazine.com/comments.php?shownews=19483
I know they come from the same wafers, but like you said dice are very different.Vicotnik wrote:E8500 and E8400 are the same processor. The only difference is the default multiplier.
That being said, all processors are different. Statisticly the E8500 should overclock a little better since it's guaranteed to work at a slightly higher clock than the E8400. But as the yield is getting better with time, the general difference should decline.
E8400 delivers most bang for your bucks, like juamez says.
Hmm. I doubt the difference is very large. I think I will get E8400. Will probably be GPU limited anyway.
-
angelkiller
- Posts: 871
- Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 11:37 am
- Location: North Carolina
Hm. 
I disagree. Unfortunately, I don't have facts to back myself up, but here's how I see it.
The E8400 and E8500 are the same chip and the E8500 is rated to run faster. What that means to me is that both chips will have the same maximum frequency at any voltage. This is explainable. Lets say the maximum OC of the E8500 on stock voltage is 3.5GHz. Then (assuming both chips have the same stock v) the E8400 will also have a maximum stock v OC of 3.5GHz. In this case both CPUs are running 3.5GHz at the same voltage. The difference is that the E8500 is experiencing an 11% OC while the E8400 is experiencing a 17% OC. (369MHz FSB vs 389MHz FSB)
I would think that relationship continues until the maximum frequency. The chips will OC identically but the E8500 will always use a lower FSB. Technically this is "easier" so the E8500 is the better OCer. But is it worth the extra cost? (Not imo) But the real question is which will run cooler. Using the above example, the E8500 will not run cooler than the E8400. They'll get the same OC at the same voltage. (And of course, this whole example assumes the two CPUs are the same chip and batch)
I disagree. Unfortunately, I don't have facts to back myself up, but here's how I see it.The E8400 and E8500 are the same chip and the E8500 is rated to run faster. What that means to me is that both chips will have the same maximum frequency at any voltage. This is explainable. Lets say the maximum OC of the E8500 on stock voltage is 3.5GHz. Then (assuming both chips have the same stock v) the E8400 will also have a maximum stock v OC of 3.5GHz. In this case both CPUs are running 3.5GHz at the same voltage. The difference is that the E8500 is experiencing an 11% OC while the E8400 is experiencing a 17% OC. (369MHz FSB vs 389MHz FSB)
I would think that relationship continues until the maximum frequency. The chips will OC identically but the E8500 will always use a lower FSB. Technically this is "easier" so the E8500 is the better OCer. But is it worth the extra cost? (Not imo) But the real question is which will run cooler. Using the above example, the E8500 will not run cooler than the E8400. They'll get the same OC at the same voltage. (And of course, this whole example assumes the two CPUs are the same chip and batch)
No. Every CPU is unique. If you test two E8400s they will (probably) not overclock the same, even if they come from the very same batch.angelkiller wrote:The E8400 and E8500 are the same chip and the E8500 is rated to run faster. What that means to me is that both chips will have the same maximum frequency at any voltage.
When I contracted at Intel, I learned the chips all come from the same wafer. The yield quality varies on this wafer, so each chip is tested and rated. The higher quality chips have faster clock ratings. As Intel continues to purify the process, the yield quality goes up.
There is something in the chip circuitry that slows it down and reduces its performance rating. Assumption tells me this 'something' is tied to heat generation. OC'ing with the associated increase in voltage brings additional heat which further aggravates this condition. I do not OC, but I am told increasing the voltage raises the signal-to-noise ratio at the expense of higher heat generation.
There is something in the chip circuitry that slows it down and reduces its performance rating. Assumption tells me this 'something' is tied to heat generation. OC'ing with the associated increase in voltage brings additional heat which further aggravates this condition. I do not OC, but I am told increasing the voltage raises the signal-to-noise ratio at the expense of higher heat generation.
-
angelkiller
- Posts: 871
- Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 11:37 am
- Location: North Carolina
Yes, what you said it true. To rephrase what I said, I think I was speaking about what happens in "ideal conditions", which don't happen in real life. However, there is a reason that certain CPUs are known for high overclocks. It's because generally the chip has great OCing potential. So what I said was more or less true generally.Vicotnik wrote:No. Every CPU is unique. If you test two E8400s they will (probably) not overclock the same, even if they come from the very same batch.angelkiller wrote:The E8400 and E8500 are the same chip and the E8500 is rated to run faster. What that means to me is that both chips will have the same maximum frequency at any voltage.
One huge thing to remember. Intel also possibly bins processors on their leakage. The variance in leakage between each processor can be huge. It's certainly possible an E8400 could actually use more power than a E8500 if the leakage is terrible enough.(This is obviously not usual though) AMD has had huge problems with this and I think they still do.