2X L2 cache worth it?

[Wonderwill]

Should I spend an extra $100 on the E6600 instead of getting an E6400, or get another 2 gigs of RAM? I will be editing lots of video and was wondering if the extra 2Mb of L2 cache and an extra 300Mhz are worth a hundred bucks.

 

[mad-dog]

If you've already got 2gig's of RAM then your set for RAM,
The great debate, L2 cache vs CPU speed........The argument is very application specific and requires setting boundaries on how much of a difference in L2 cache or speed in MHz between 2 given processors.
I can justify 2x as much L2 cache for another $100 especially when it also includes another 200MHz of processor speed.
Did i answer your question....No, but it is a interesting discussion that i love having with myself.

 

[sithscout80]

If you have 2GB of RAM already, I would go for the faster processor. I've done video editing and it is very dependent on the speed of the processor (and most likely the cache as well).
I would recommend getting the E6600 (if you already have 2GB of RAM).

 

[dasickninja]

It really depends on what you are doing and what your budget is. Do you plan on overclocking by any chance?

 

[mpjesse]

Recent benchmarks have shown the extra 2MB doesn't make a big difference. HOWEVER, as applications move on so do their requirements. In other words, going forward, there will be a performance difference in new games and apps.

If it were me, I'd get the E6600. You never want to regret a purchase... esp. not for a measly $100.

 

[bobfan]

you can always add more ram to your computer, and its cheaper than buying a new processor. i have read that going from 1gb to 2gb of ram will cost you 100% with a performance gain of like 10%. i dont plan on upgrading to vista, unless i have to for halo2 and other games, im still researching that. buy the better cpu and oc it, and you will be set. but if you already have 2 gb of ram and want another 2 gb of ram, get the better processor for sure.

 

[Dahak]

If you already have 2 gigs of ram then go for the processor and yes the extra cache does help in video streaming.Goodluck.

Dahak

primary gaming rig
AMD X2-4400+@2.4 S-939
EVGA NF4 SLI MB
2X EVGA 7800GT CO IN SLI
2X1GIG DDR IN DC MODE
WD300GIG HD
EXTREME 19IN.MONITOR 1280X1024
ACE 520WATT PSU
COOLERMASTER MINI R120

secondary gaming rig
GYGABYTE MB AGP
AMD X2 3800+ S-939
2X512 DDR IN DC MODE
X1650PRO 512 AGP
17IN.MONITOR
MAXTOR 120GIG HD
450WATT PSU

 

[Wonderwill]

It really depends on what you are doing and what your budget is. Do you plan on overclocking by any chance?

A tiny bit, maybe if I feel like it.

 

[mikeny]

Hello. I was also curious. I have the e6300. Is it worth it to move to the conroe with 4mb L2 cache? My ram is corsair xms2 ddr2-533 (3-3-3-8) 1GB (x2 sticks of 512mb). I only play games (no FPS). I was thinking of adding another 1GB to my RAM but it seems like the memory I have has disapeared off the face of all online retailers.

 

[dasickninja]

In accordance with your answer, I'll go with recommending the E6600.

 

[NMDante]

No the extra L2 cache won't make that much difference, as much as 1GB of RAM might.

I have the E6400 and E6600, and the E6600 kills in encoding/decoding video, but when gaming, my E6600 wins only because of the GPU in my system, compared to my E6400 (7600GT vs. X1300 Pro). If both had the same card, I can wager than gaming would be pretty damn close in terms of FPS and quality.

To the OP: The extra cache will help with encoding, as some have mentioned. I use Sony Vegas, Premire Pro, and some other video editing software, and my E6600 runs smooth with one or more of these apps running at the same time. Of course, if I start to encode with Vegas or Premire Pro at the same time, it will slow my system down a lot.