E2160 v/s E4300

8 posts · originally from https://geek.digit.in/community/threads/e2160-v-s-e4300.62189/

I am confused as to which processor offers more value for money. My hardware dealer offered me the E2160 at 3.9k and the E4300 at 5.2K . I found that both of them are similar accept for the fact that the latter has 2MB of L2 cache whereas the former has 1MB. Both of them are excellent overclockers with some sites claiming speeds upto 3.5Ghz. I want to engage in low res gaming. So guys, please suggest!

yup.. The only diff between them is the cache.. Even the fsb speed is the same.. However considering the 1.3k price diff.. 2160 seems more vfm

there a difference of 500-600Rs, and the 4300 is worth it.

Well , the E4300 would be the better choice .. i donno how much diff. 4 MB L2 makes from 2 MB L2 , but for Intel CPU's , 2 MB L2 will make noticeable diff. from 1 MB L2 for sure ..

Intel doesnt even mention C2D in the box of the E2160. But both the processors are based on the allendale architecture.

Is d E2140/60 a C2D??? I doubt... I heard those're jus Dual cores...

gannu_rox said:
Is d E2140/60 a C2D??? I doubt... I heard those're jus Dual cores...

It's the same architecture, the E2XXX will beat the E4300 if clocked 300-400 Mhz above, that's my guess, besides, look at the overclocks, only the conroe/allendale scales that well.

Well the E2XXX are Conroe Cores and E4XXX are Allendale cores but still the Core 2 Duo