so intel is coming out with a budget E4300

[an0nym0us]

dual core 1.8ghz 800fsb 2mb shared L2 and a 9x multiplier. it should be a great overclocker. anyone have any info on these processors?

[jph1589]

I also saw in that aritcle that there is pentium 935 being released at the same time (Jan 07). Prices are to be 935/$135 and 4300/$163.

On the one hand, If I were Intel (glad I'm not) I would stop production on the entire Pentium D line. The prices on the lower end core 2 chips are very affordable and they should be able to shift all their production to that. It would be a much smarter move for them with regard to profits and if they paid a little more attention to that, they might not have to lay off 10,000 people at a time. It would also be smart to put all their focus into the new architecture so that they at least keep ahead of AMD long enough to enjoy it a little.

On the other hand, all of these new 9x5 series chips are their way of admitting that some of the hardware upgrades required to get into Core 2 are just a little too steep for the average user. I think there is a 915 and 945 and maybe even a 925 available some places now. These are just Intels way of admitting that people don't really want EIST or VIIV. The 9xx chips run so cool that speed stepping isn't required anyway. The main problem I see with buying one of them is that you will get flakey support from most of the motherboard vendors. Most of them still haven't even acknowledged that any of the 9x5 chips exist and have not included any of them on their supported cpu lists. I know some people dont pay attention to those lists, but personal experience makes me unable to ignore them.

The last thing that I can't quite figure out, is the 4300 chip. Why do an 800fsb core 2? I just don't get it. If you want to upgrade to a conroe, you will have to have a new motherboard that can handle the 1066 fsb and most of those are meant to overclock. You probably bought new memory at the same time due to the higher FSB. Considering the already low price of the 6400, again I will say I just dont' get it.

I didn't really mean to write a book here, but the more I thought about this it is a very good example of how AMD gained so much ground on Intel in such a short period of time. Intel can't seem to focus.

In my opinion ...of course :!:

[gvblake22]

It is an interesting price/performance point they are trying to hit with the E4300, but I'm not complaining. The 800mhz FSB is probably the only thing they settled on to make it come in somewhere between the Core based Celerons and the full fledged E6xxx chips. The FSB thing really isn't too much of an issue with RAM either because of the dividers. AMD chips are all 200mhz bus speed (HTT), but they also support DDR2-800 RAM because of the dividers. So I would imagine that since the memory controller for intel platforms is on the chipset (not on die on the CPU like the Athlon64's), that memory speed support will be dependant on the motherboard and chipset, rather then the processor. I can't wait to see how these chips do, I'm super excited for their release and will probably dive into an Intel setup with one if they prove to be worth while.

[jph1589]

Originally Posted by gvblake22

It is an interesting price/performance point they are trying to hit with the E4300, but I'm not complaining. The 800mhz FSB is probably the only thing they settled on to make it come in somewhere between the Core based Celerons and the full fledged E6xxx chips. The FSB thing really isn't too much of an issue with RAM either because of the dividers. AMD chips are all 200mhz bus speed (HTT), but they also support DDR2-800 RAM because of the dividers. So I would imagine that since the memory controller for intel platforms is on the chipset (not on die on the CPU like the Athlon64's), that memory speed support will be dependant on the motherboard and chipset, rather then the processor. I can't wait to see how these chips do, I'm super excited for their release and will probably dive into an Intel setup with one if they prove to be worth while.

I guess maybe I was thinking more about overclockers on the memory issue. Wouldn't you think that the majority of them are still spread between 533 and 667? That would mean they will be upgrading before they buy a conroe to overclock.

For the average user, the 4300 will only be $17 dollars cheaper than the 6300 is now and the price will certainly go down after x-mass. So I'd pay $17 for a 266mhz FSB increase if it was me.

In strategy this is a little like when they announced the 805. But the big difference is that the 805 was miles away from the other 8xx chips in price. That is why I still dont get the strategy on this one.

Maybe I'm just tired from cutting the grass or it could very well be that I'm just tired of Intel's chip dejour. LOL!! On the other hand I'm still pretty new to the world of watching the daily technology announcements, and there are still a lot of them that just flabbergast me.

[an0nym0us]

the reason i'm looking to the 4300 is because it has 200fsb and 9x multiplier. with DDR2 800, you can run up to 400mhz 1:1 and not have any memory issues. i think it might be a stellar overclocker judging by what other Core chips have done in the past/present i predict that the 4300 will be a sickass overclocker on a DS3 board.

by january biostar should have something i can put in a mATX case that will take C2D's to the limits. i can mess with the 4300 on my DS3 or the biostar mATX board, then when i find the sweet spot for the CPU/RAM i'll throw it in an aspire mATX case with an all-in-wonder and make it my HTPC.

specs wise, to up the FSB of this particular proc to 1066 you need a mild 66mhz overclock which would yeild almost 2.4ghz, to hit 3ghz you'd only need to be running 333fsb, whereas on my setup i'm at 430fsb to hit 3ghz. the 4300 should play out to be a nice chip to tweak.

[jph1589]

Originally Posted by an0nym0us

the reason i'm looking to the 4300 is because it has 200fsb and 9x multiplier. with DDR2 800, you can run up to 400mhz 1:1 and not have any memory issues. i think it might be a stellar overclocker judging by what other Core chips have done in the past/present i predict that the 4300 will be a sickass overclocker on a DS3 board.

by january biostar should have something i can put in a mATX case that will take C2D's to the limits. i can mess with the 4300 on my DS3 or the biostar mATX board, then when i find the sweet spot for the CPU/RAM i'll throw it in an aspire mATX case with an all-in-wonder and make it my HTPC.

specs wise, to up the FSB of this particular proc to 1066 you need a mild 66mhz overclock which would yeild almost 2.4ghz, to hit 3ghz you'd only need to be running 333fsb, whereas on my setup i'm at 430fsb to hit 3ghz. the 4300 should play out to be a nice chip to tweak.

That all makes complete sense. Now you are going to go and get me interested in it.

Shaking my head!!

[gvblake22]

Good call An. The 400mhz fsb paired with the higher 9x multiplier definately make the E4300 something to get excited about. But like you mentioned jph, a lot will have to do with the price of the thing too. If it isn't much different than the E6300, it will be easy to find yourself on the fence between the two. Only time will tell!

[an0nym0us]

only time will tell, but the 4300 should prove to be a nice little chip, i mean think about it... it's not too far off of the E6300 performance wise stock. at least not on paper. hopefully this bad boy can hit 3ghz when it finally gets released.

[fps justin]

These little suckers remind me of my venice 3000+ back a few years ago.