Exactly how much faster is Intel?

[hat]

What if I were to move to an Intel system with an E3200 processor clocked at 3GHz just like my current Kuma. How much faster would it be? Anything noticible?

 

[MKmods]

In real life? No.
(benches who knows)

 

[newtekie1]

I don't think the E3200 would really be any better than the Kuma at the same clock speeds. Though I also believe the E3200 would be able to clock higher than the Kuma, and in the end would perform better. Not worth the cost and effort of switching though.

 

[hat]

That's what I thought...

 

[ToTTenTranz]

I'm pretty sure that a cache-castrated C2D like the E3200 can be slower than a Kuma, clock-for-clock.

 

[theonedub]

I'm pretty sure that a cache-castrated C2D like the E3200 can be slower than a Kuma, clock-for-clock.

I agree with that statement. 1MB cache really cripples the E3200, it really isn't much of an upgrade from a E2200 (whose slowness I can personally vouch for). E5200 is the minimum, or its Q counterpart: Q8200.

 

[Chad Boga]

What if I were to move to an Intel system with an E3200 processor clocked at 3GHz just like my current Kuma. How much faster would it be? Anything noticible?

How much does the E3200 sell for compared to some of the faster models.

In my town the computer stores must think no one would be interested in that model as they don't sell it, only faster stuff.

 

[KainXS]

newteckie is right, at the end of the day the the E3200 would clock higher but its not really worth the upgrade, your next step should be some thing like a quad, not another dual

 

[newtekie1]

I agree with that statement. 1MB cache really cripples the E3200, it really isn't much of an upgrade from a E2200 (whose slowness I can personally vouch for). E5200 is the minimum, or its Q counterpart: Q8200.

I don't know, it is hard to find information to make that conclusion. The E2000 series came clocked so low by default, that most comparisions don't give you anywhere close to a good idea of how it would perform clock for clock with a Kuma.

The major difference is that the E2000 series would reach about the same clocks in the end as a Kuma when overclocked(3.0-3.4GHz). However, the E3000 series, being 45nm, should be good for about 4.0GHz or better.

I think in the end, the E3000 would be pretty close clock for clock, but the E3000 would overclock a hell of a lot better, giving it the edge. However, I think going with something like the Athlon II 450 would be a better choice financially, as it should give better performance than the Kuma and better overclocks, with the board you have now. Though it wouldn't be as fun...