Is there any significant improvment between these 3 processors?

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T7200 / 4MB L2 Cache, 2.0 GHz, 667MHz FSB

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T7200 / 4MB L2 Cache, 2.16 GHz, 667MHz FSB

Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor T7200 / 4MB L2 Cache, 2.33 GHz, 667MHz FSB


Is the 2.16GHz worth the extra $140? Is the 2.33GHz worth the extra $370?

 

one thing to remember is that most people NEVER stress their CPUs for more than a few nanoseconds at a time. MOST of the time, the cpus run at half speed for battery conservation and heat issues.

unless you are doing some seriously CPU intensive stuff like video renders that take hours, days, weeks, you won't notice a difference.

that being said, i wouldn't pay more than, at max, 50 bux to jump from 2 to 2.16 or from 2.16 to 2.33, but that's just me.

tell us what you're doing with the computer and we'll be better able to answer the question

 

Gaming (Oblivion, Crysis, Company of Heros) will be the most intesive stuff i will be doing.

 

just get the highest-end video card you can, the most ram you can, the fastest HD you can, and then if you have some $ leftover, upgrade the CPU, but i would worry about it last.

 

Alright, thanks. i was gonna go for the 2.16, but ill use that $140 to get a 100GB 7200RPM HD instead.

 

I have just one question

2 me it seems like you are talking about the core 2 duos

i think this is what u ment, i get that we understand it but at first i thought companies were selling overclocked t7200's

i think this is what you meant:

to answer your question, u really dont need a cpu that big of a monster for $140 bucks, i would stick with like T5500 or T5600if u rly r going intense then get the T7200, but like 1.66/1.83 GHz dual core is great, with a 2mb cache, it should fit your needs if your a heavy gamer, i doubt anyone really needs a 2.3 GHz cpu thats just what i think.

 

I would go for the T7200 so you can get the 4 MB cache. Spend the extra money on that 7200 RPM hard drive, you will benefit more from that than from a faster processor.

 

i think there is some mispelling in here; the

T7200 is the 4MB L2 Cache, 2.0 GHz, 667MHz FSB
T7400 is the 4MB L2 Cache, 2.16 GHz, 667MHz FSB
T7600 is the 4MB L2 Cache, 2.33 GHz, 667MHz FSB

out of all that; i would get the T7200 or the T7400; since the jump is still reasonable. NOT the T7600 the premium they ask is insane.

 

I am going to buy the 2Ghz version. The price increases for the two above it aren't worth the performance increase. It's also the cheapest Core 2 Duo with 4MB of cache.

 

I just went with a t5600... the highest 2 meg version. But I'd go with the t7200 if I was you.

 

Good move,you'd notice minimal performance increase for such a price!

 

??? the t7200 got the best price to performance ratio if that what u mean. don't go lower than that!

 

For your needs, something cheap like a T2300 or T2400 would be perfect. You won't notice the difference in any of those games, except Oblivion.

I play Oblivion on my Z96J with a T2400. It runs perfectly fine. The X1600 is by far a bigger bottleneck than the T2400. Most of those games you could play at sub 1ghz levels and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. However, Oblivion is different. I doubt your would get more than 5-10 frames extra with a T7600 compared to a T2400. Save yourself the money and get something cheaper.