E6400 or E6600?

[enforcerfx]

Im trying to setup my list for my next setup that i will hopefully order during April's price drops. Im confused on what i should get, the E6400 or the E6600.
The E6400 has lower cache, while the E6600 has a higher cache value and I dont know how that plays in with everything. Im expecting to overclock to get the most out of either one i choose, but the extra 100 or not is what I dont know of. Here is my list so far:

Gigabyte DS3
TT Armor
E6400 or E6600
Supertalent 2x1GB or Patriot Extreme 2x1GB (Supertalent has PC6400, while the Patriot has PC1066)
Reusing watercooling system
1 150GB raptor
1 250GB WD SE16, pairing with my current WD SE16 250GB for raid
8800GTX
Windows XP Home
Corsair HX520

Suggestions?

Thanks

 

[Assman]

if you were ordering right now i'd say e6400, but since you don't mind waiting for price to go down than maybe you'll be able to afford e6600

also, check this out

 

[alcattle]

If you are going to wait, you can get the e6420. Same cache as e6600 and should be lower priced. The e6600 will be $224 and the e6420 we be $183

 

[enforcerfx]

Oh, hmmmm. Then what is the overall difference between the 2, besides price if cache size is same? Hmmm, this price drop is going to be loads of fun though! Thats a significant price drop from 313.00. And thanks for the chart assman, maybe the E6600 might be the one to go for during the price drop. Ill take a peek at the E6420 though, when does it hit the market?

 

[wilcoxon]

If you are going to wait, you can get the e6420. Same cache as e6600 and should be lower priced. The e6600 will be $224 and the e6420 we be $183

Nice price drops. Does anyone have a link to the Intel price drop chart and know when it will happen (I've only heard "April" so far)?

 

[akhilles]

Depends. I'd get the 6600 hands down cuz of its overclockability. My friend's pc hit 3.6ghz on air. I've seen someone reaching 3.9ghz on water/phase/tec/NL.

 

[Assman]

well with e6600 you do get mult. 9 which is nice 8)

 

[Eviltwin17]

you probably wont notice that much of a difference in performance between cache sizes if you are overclocking and not doing anything that is any higher than gaming.

 

[sanjiwatsuki]

you probably wont notice that much of a difference in performance between cache sizes if you are overclocking and not doing anything that is any higher than gaming.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=2903&p=6

Personally, the L2 cache difference isn't much of a problem... now.

The entire difference in FPS is dedciated to the game's core. If the core fits within the 2MB L2 cache then all if fine and they'll perform similarly.

Suppose the core is more complex and doesn't fit in the cache. There is a hit to game-play performance.

Depending on the application, the cache may or may not have a difference.

In the future, games will become more complex and therefore need more L2 cache. When that rolls around, the Allendale and Conroe-2M series will begin to lag in games even at higher clock speeds.

That is what I've been hearing, at least.