Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD Athalon 64 X2 clock freq vs L2 cache

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 5, 2006 10:38:16 PM

I've been considering the AMD Athalon 64 X2 proc with its 1GB L2 cache clocking at 2000 Mhz. The other 64 X2 procs have a 512MB L2 cache but some go up to 2200 & 2400 Mhz. When comparing the AMD 64 X2 procs in the 2000 to 2400 Mhx range, is the size of the L2 cache more significant than the extra Mhz when trying to get the most performance?
September 5, 2006 11:08:35 PM

the L2 cache in AMD processors nets little to no performance increase, thats exactly why AMD is discontinuing the 1MB (not 1GB) L2 cache processors and just sticking with the 512KB L2 cache ones, so in this case you will just want the fastest processor you can get after looking at the ones your refering to are the 4200 and 4600.. i think, the 5000+ would be the best but they are very hard to find and also overpriced because of there limited availability
September 5, 2006 11:27:48 PM

i heard 1mb cpu's cost more to manufacture than 512kb cpu's. at the time, c2d was weeks from release & cpu prices were falling and AMD seen it as a waste of money
Related resources
September 6, 2006 12:37:50 AM

Quote:
I've been considering the AMD Athalon 64 X2 proc with its 1GB L2 cache clocking at 2000 Mhz. The other 64 X2 procs have a 512MB L2 cache but some go up to 2200 & 2400 Mhz. When comparing the AMD 64 X2 procs in the 2000 to 2400 Mhx range, is the size of the L2 cache more significant than the extra Mhz when trying to get the most performance?


wow 1gb? holy sh!t, just kidding everyone makes mistakes... its 1mb but its really only like a4% increase for the same clock speed... i don't rember the arcticle that i saw it in but i'm sure i could find it if i had to.
September 6, 2006 12:49:13 AM

I would point out that another thread on Toms with a link to a Microsoft article on Hyper-threading seems to indicate that larger L2's will play a more important role as Hyper-threading becomes more popular (and better programming) with the introduction of Vista and the influx of cheap dual cores.
September 6, 2006 12:57:02 AM

512 Will do just as well and less expensive then the 1MB part, also you will have less heat emanating off the larger core and transistor count
!