Intel Core 2 Duo E4300: Affordable and Highly Overclockable
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 10, 2007 2:45 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Encoding Performance
At default clock speeds, the Core 2 Duo E4300 completed our DivX test in the same amount of time as AMD's Athlon 64 X2 5000+. Overclocked, the E4300 has a 11% advantage over the X6800.
Windows Media Encoder is far more favorable to AMD CPUs and thus the E4300 ends up being a little slower than the X2 4200+. Our overclocked chip ends up, once again, on top of the charts.
MP3 encoding performance is quite competitive, with the E4300 offering performance similar to the X2 4600+ and the E6300. Overclocked performance is once again competitive with the X6800.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
68 Comments
View All Comments
dubrov - Sunday, February 11, 2007 - link
WHY IN ARTICLE PICTURE I SEE:VOLTAGE = 1.213 v
WHILE THE TEXT BELOW THE PICTURE STATES:
VOLTAGE = 1.468 V
Which one is true?
P.S. Bought E4300 yesterday - it DOES NOT POST on FSB > 325 MHz at a default voltage.
Is it safe to raise the voltage up to 1.5 V (won't it burn the core2 before the temperature sensor reacts)?
penga - Sunday, February 4, 2007 - link
E4300 is the n1 competitor to the X2 EE SFF Series regarding power/performance-efficiency, so why would u not include at least an X2 3800 EE SFF or an 4000+ 65nm in ur tests?coolme - Friday, February 2, 2007 - link
Overall, this is a great review. The really throughly explained the advantages, and the disadvantages of the E4300. (Basically an underclocked E6700 that's doesn't have virtualization, and E4400 will have a x10 multiplier) I just wanted to say thanks, and note a minor typo in the review.In page 7, power consumption the paragraph between the 2 charts "Overclocked, the E6300 uses a bit more power than the X6800 but that’s to be expected.". It's the E4300 that's overclocked, not E6300.
Thanks, and keep up the good work!
lapierrem - Friday, January 19, 2007 - link
I am surprised, that I have not yet seen a single one of these up on ebay yet.What gives? Release something awesome but don't actually put any stock out there...and make everyone wait and the price go up...
Yongsta - Sunday, January 14, 2007 - link
Looks good, can't wait I've been holding on my next upgrade for something like this. Initially I had a Celeron 300 ($100) which I overclocked to 500 mhz+ and outperformed P4 450 ($650). Next upgrade was both Barton 2500 ($90) overclocked to past Barton 3200 speeds & P4 2.4c ($170) at 3.6 ghz. All my purchases were best bang for the buck (including video cards in the past with hacks to enable disabled pipelines, etc) and in this chip it looks like I can get it again.aznskickass - Thursday, January 11, 2007 - link
The overclocked performance of the E4300 @ 3.37GHz looks very low IMO.Anandtech - are you sure the E4300 was not throttling at this point? I would assume 3.37GHz/1.475V on the stock HSF would get pretty hot, possibly hot enough to trigger CPU throttling.
just4U - Saturday, January 13, 2007 - link
Some one mentioned here that a 3Ghz C2D value chip will walk all over Amd's Budgit X2's running at 1.8- 2.0G.I sort of found that a rather odd comment to make. Many enthusiast's look at these chips for overclock potential so.. chances are you wouldnt be dealing with a stock X2 either.
I kinda wish they had the 3800 overclocked as well so we could get a look at both of them and compare it on a more level playing field. Granted the C2D would still walk all over the amd chip but it would be interesting to see the results.
cmdrdredd - Thursday, January 11, 2007 - link
Where is the clock for clock comparisons? E4300 @ same speed as like an E6400 (overclock both to like 3Ghz) and test. That will let us really see if it's worth spending the extra cash for the E6300/6400.harpoon84 - Thursday, January 11, 2007 - link
The E4300 is slightly faster than the X2 4200+ overall - go ahead, count how many the E4300 wins, and how many the X2 4200+ wins. The E4300 wins the count 8 - 3, although those numbers are a bit misleading as most of the time the margins between the chips are very close.In terms of price/performance, the $163 pricetag is justified, but I still prefer it at the Q2 price of $113! ;)
Xcom1Cheetah - Thursday, January 11, 2007 - link
Look pretty tempting but i think it is priced a little higher likeFirstly it look like as is it a high end Core 2 Celeron (with lower FSB and half the cache BUT 2 cores). So it should be priced in between Celeron and Core 2 Territory.
Secondly its performance overall at stock speed is between X2 3800+ and X2 4200+.. The 3800+ is going for 133 and 4200+ is for 169... (i m talking about newegg prices)
So it should be priced like around US $150 at most in my view... and around 3800+ price to give AMD even more tough time.:) but not more than US $150 in any case.
Just my view..