Pressler D950 vs Conroe E6600

Just briefly, besides the 1066 vs 800 FSB and the 4MB vs 2MB L2 cache, why
would I go with the Conroe rather than the Pressler? Or are those two
factors worth the extra $140? The D950 is 3.2GHz and the E6600 is 2.4. I'm
not a multitasker per se, but I do occasional video/photo editing. I will
not be OC-ing this to the hilt and I'm not planning on using a water cooled
setup. Thoughts?

Ron

$150 extra dollor is well worth the performance you are going to get from
it..

In almost 90% benchmarks E6600 beaten or equaled AMD fx 62 or P4 EE, its not
just 4mb cash its shared cache meaning if core 1 is finished processing
threads from its current cache it will look in core 2 cache to process any
threads before looking into system RAM thus reducing lot of processing time
as seen in many benchmarks. You don't need water cooling with it either
stock cooling is just fine for the task you are gonna do plus additional
taks you can do such as video editing and doing something else at the same
time.

Just take a look at why core 2 duo is better on www.google.com
My 2 cents spend extra $140 and you won't be disappointed. Also speed in
Mhz doesn't always gives better performance as it used to be in previous P4
models.

Cheers





"Ron Krebs" <> wrote in message
news:_s3Mg.4748$I71.4620@trnddc01...
> Just briefly, besides the 1066 vs 800 FSB and the 4MB vs 2MB L2 cache, why
> would I go with the Conroe rather than the Pressler? Or are those two
> factors worth the extra $140? The D950 is 3.2GHz and the E6600 is 2.4.
> I'm
> not a multitasker per se, but I do occasional video/photo editing. I will
> not be OC-ing this to the hilt and I'm not planning on using a water
> cooled
> setup. Thoughts?
>
> Ron
>
>

"Ron Krebs" <> wrote in message
news:_s3Mg.4748$I71.4620@trnddc01...
> Just briefly, besides the 1066 vs 800 FSB and the 4MB vs 2MB L2 cache, why
> would I go with the Conroe rather than the Pressler? Or are those two
> factors worth the extra $140? The D950 is 3.2GHz and the E6600 is 2.4.
I'm
> not a multitasker per se, but I do occasional video/photo editing. I will
> not be OC-ing this to the hilt and I'm not planning on using a water
cooled
> setup. Thoughts?
>
> Ron
>
The E6600 is faster,cooler running,and more energy efficent.GHz really isn't
a factor with dual cores they way it used to be with older models.
The 6600 will equal or outperform AMD's top of the line FX62.

"Gojira" <> wrote in message
newsu9Mg.6704$I71.3936@trnddc01...
>
> "Ron Krebs" <> wrote in message
> news:_s3Mg.4748$I71.4620@trnddc01...
> > Just briefly, besides the 1066 vs 800 FSB and the 4MB vs 2MB L2 cache,
why
> > would I go with the Conroe rather than the Pressler? Or are those two
> > factors worth the extra $140? The D950 is 3.2GHz and the E6600 is 2.4.
> I'm
> > not a multitasker per se, but I do occasional video/photo editing. I
will
> > not be OC-ing this to the hilt and I'm not planning on using a water
> cooled
> > setup. Thoughts?
> >
> > Ron
> >
> The E6600 is faster,cooler running,and more energy efficent.GHz really
isn't
> a factor with dual cores they way it used to be with older models.
> The 6600 will equal or outperform AMD's top of the line FX62.
>
>

Ok, one more quick question which may be a bit OT. The system RAM. Is the
speed of the RAM a function of the motherboard, CPU, or both? The board I'm
getting has 1066MHz FSB and I know the E6600 can operate at that speed. But
the board mfg says that it can handle PC6400 DDR2 RAM which would be 667
RAM. Now if the board only goes 1066 wouldn't that mean that you'd only get
533 RAM to fill the slots since 533X2 is 1066? I mean wouldn't you need a
mobo that is capable of 1333MHz FSB to realize the full potential of DDR2
667? Thanks again.

Ron

The D950 runs MUCH hotter natively and has a far more inefficient internal
pathway than the Conroe's. GHz for GHz the Conroe's will outperform the
Pressler's by a wide margin.

--
DaveW

----------------
"Ron Krebs" <> wrote in message
news:_s3Mg.4748$I71.4620@trnddc01...
> Just briefly, besides the 1066 vs 800 FSB and the 4MB vs 2MB L2 cache, why
> would I go with the Conroe rather than the Pressler? Or are those two
> factors worth the extra $140? The D950 is 3.2GHz and the E6600 is 2.4.
> I'm
> not a multitasker per se, but I do occasional video/photo editing. I will
> not be OC-ing this to the hilt and I'm not planning on using a water
> cooled
> setup. Thoughts?
>
> Ron
>
>

Ron Krebs wrote:
> Just briefly, besides the 1066 vs 800 FSB and the 4MB vs 2MB L2 cache, why
> would I go with the Conroe rather than the Pressler? Or are those two
> factors worth the extra $140? The D950 is 3.2GHz and the E6600 is 2.4. I'm
> not a multitasker per se, but I do occasional video/photo editing. I will
> not be OC-ing this to the hilt and I'm not planning on using a water cooled
> setup. Thoughts?

I just went 6600, lower power, faster (results, not clock speed), new
tech vs. tech at end-of-life. Unless the cost is a deal breaker, I would
go 6600. Best reason yet, Intel says the quad core will drop in to
replace the 6600/6700. Modulo a BIOS upgrade I think it's likely. Big
cache will really help photo work, less memory bus contention.

Some boards let you o/c the memory independently of the CPU. I just got
some DDR675 (PC5400) RAM, and I plan to try that after the system burns
in. Just came UPS this afternoon, details Monday.

My business reason for this system was building Linux kernels, but some
video work is probably in the future.

--
Bill Davidsen <>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot