Do you have problems understanding that the 750MHz duron is much better than a 450MHz PII in EVERY ASPECT?
Even though the P2 has 512k L2 it is off die cache (works at half core speed; i.e. 225MHz). Duron's cache in only 64k but is on-die and much more effective the a p2's. Furthermore, duron's bus is 200MHz while the P2 only has half of it (100Mhz). Thet's why durons compete even with P3s in some benchmarks (they only managed to run on a 133MHz bus). So if you want to make a comparision, compare the duron 750 to a 700-750Mhz P3.
Furthermore, if you have a good board you can even set the Duron well at around 1Ghz while there's nothing you can squeeze out of the fastest pII.
Heya, don't be snotty bro.
The PII 450 would be based on the deschutes core, boasting SDRAM cache with speed of 5ns, located off-die with a 64-bit data path.
While this cache was fast for it's time, the timings of the cache was very high. If you took a Katmai core with 5.5ns memory which came in much tighter timings, and clocked the core to match the 450, the older cache turns out to be faster.
This concludes that your chip's cache is slower than that of the previous generation PII's.
Also take into consideration that the cache is running, like m25 mentioned, at 225 MHZ.
225MHZ 5ns SDRAM with very loose timings (tight's where it at!).
The duron, on the other hand, has simply 64kb on-die, with the same 64-bit data path.
On-die meant the cache is clocked full-speed, in your case, 750mhz. It also used Static-Ram (SRAM) in which we really don't care what timings and speed is, because it's so blazingly fast, I've not seen any calculations of it.
The duron, on the other hand, has another advantage in cache. That is it sports a large 128kb L1 cache which people seem to forget mentioning, and is even faster than on die L2 cache.
that's a total of 192kb of cache that is more than 3 times the speed of your Pentium II. Faster cache is more effective than more cache.
You have to consider you're looking at overall performance. What is this cache, this speed, this processor going to accomplish compared to your PII?
The Duron was to compete directly to the Celeron, and completely creamed those chips. However, it also stood up to the later Pentium III's of its time. A similarly equipped Duron 700mhz system would give similar performance overall to a Pentium III 667mhz system.
A pentium III 667mhz system is more than twice as fast as any PII system out there.
The Duron, however, has an insanely powerful floating point unit compared to even the PIII's, and in any number crunching or 3d rendering or such situation, the Duron 650 slaughters the Pentium III 733 with a comparable 90 frames/hour to the PIII's 73.5 frames/hour.
I hope this helps to see where your Duron stands in comparison to it's competition. The duron isn't equipped with the quantity of what it's competition has, it had less transistors, less cache... but time and time again, especially seen with Intel's failed Netburst, it's not quantity. It's how efficiently the processor can use its resources. In Duron's case, every resource is used to utmost efficiency.
If you have any other specific question, I'll be happy to answer with every possible outlook available.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram