Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

jfri

E7200 or E8400 or Q6600 for FSX

Recommended Posts

When building a new system I'm considering one of these three CPUs.I would like to know a little bit more detailed what and how would performence differ in FSX between these alternatives. I intend to use the stock cooler and a 9800GT videocard and 4 Gb 800 MHz RAM on a P35 mb. Also a Corsair HX520W modular PSU has already been purchased.E7200 is significantly cheaper than the other two. Is E8400 going to give me significantly better performence? How will Q6600 perform compared to E8400 with the stock cooler i.e no or cautious overclocking?From what I have understood it would be very bad to save money byRunning FSX without VISTA 64 since it's a 64 bit OSRunning VISTA 64 with only 2 Gb instead of 4 GbHere are links to my considered purchase cardshttp://www.datorbutiken.com/se/default.aspx?Cart=709-45191 http://www.datorbutiken.com/se/default.aspx?Cart=235-45000http://www.datorbutiken.com/se/default.aspx?Cart=353-45002I must buy the system on credit so keeping the cost down is imperative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

The E8400 will give you the highest performance of the lot at stock speed. It would give roughly 15-20% more FPS in FSX than the other two processors.If you decide to overclock with that stock cooler, you are better off staying with dual core as quad cores really heat up when pushed by overclocking. Word on the street is that the E7200 and E8400 both overclock to about the same level (around 3.8GHz), but your stock cooler will likely hold you back at these high core speeds. At the same overclock clock speed, the E7200 would be around 5% slower due to the smaller cache it has.Consider putting some of the savings you would make on selecting the E7200 and buy a mid-range cooler like the Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro that I have. This cooler would easily dissipate the heat of a dual core 3.8GHz overclock and is even sufficient for a quad core overclock up to about 3.6GHz max.Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>The E8400 will give you the highest performance of the lot at>stock speed. It would give roughly 15-20% more FPS in FSX than>the other two processors.>So it might be something like 17 fps instead of 20 fps? More important is how smooth and stutterfree it is.>If you decide to overclock with that stock cooler, you are>better off staying with dual core as quad cores really heat up>when pushed by overclocking. Word on the street is that the>E7200 and E8400 both overclock to about the same level (around>3.8GHz), but your stock cooler will likely hold you back at>these high core speeds. At the same overclock clock speed, the>E7200 would be around 5% slower due to the smaller cache it>has.>What are you bases for the cache size make a 5% difference?>Consider putting some of the savings you would make on>selecting the E7200 and buy a mid-range cooler like the Arctic>Cooling Freezer 7 Pro that I have. This cooler would easily>dissipate the heat of a dual core 3.8GHz overclock and is even>sufficient for a quad core overclock up to about 3.6GHz max.>Sound like an interesting cooler since it's so cheap. If I get a cooler it will propably be this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>So it might be something like 17 fps instead of 20 fps? More>important is how smooth and stutterfree it is.IMO, smoothness and stutterfreeness (is that a word? :-lol) are slightly in favour of the quad, but only very slightly.>What are you bases for the cache size make a 5% difference?What? You want a reputable reference? :-lol Whilst I have nothing specific I can point to right now, this was a common assessment of the worst-case performance difference between two early-gen C2Ds with different cache sizes (eg. E6400 vs E6600). I have just shamelessly extrapolated these results. Take it as a worst case hit.>Sound like an interesting cooler since it's so cheap. If I get>a cooler it will propably be this one.Should set you back $25-30 max.Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites