AMD Athlon 64 X2 3600+ Windsor

They do, but that's combined cache (both cores) 2x512k. It's similar to the HT spec. Some claim it as 1000MHz, some say 2000MHz.  

The Windsor X2 3600+ has 265K L2 for each core but it's 2.0GHz compared to 1.9 of the brisbane makes it a better performar @ stock speed.

Ok great. Thanks for all the replies.  

That's not a lot of cache, though. I'd much prefer the Brisbane.

That's not a lot of cache, though. I'd much prefer the Brisbane.


Yea, i was debating on that. I think i will go with the Brisbane. Thanks.

But performance on stock speeds actually is higher for the Windsor and 256K is still not that little for a K8 chip, only should cut a 2-3% performance at most compared to 512K L2, while 1.9 to 2.0 is 5% and more if you consider the higher latency of the Brisbane.

That's not a lot of cache, though. I'd much prefer the Brisbane.


Yea, i was debating on that. I think i will go with the Brisbane. Thanks.

Absolutely buy it over the 90nm version. More cache, lower power consumption, greater overclockability - all factors that go in the 65nm version's favor.

If you have any plans to overclock, then it's the same with cache and cores....you can't add cores/cache, once you've bought it...but you can overclock to similar speed. I would grab the Brisbane as well.

Me too, but only because it OCs better and has more L2. If I were to buy it for someone I know is not OC-ing, I'd go with the Windsor.