Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

CPU Cache Size....?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 26, 2008 4:59:37 AM

My question: Cache size and importance....?

I'm looking from a graphic desktop view, I'm considering a

Q6600(8mb cache) & Q9300(6mb cache).

With the cost lowering soon> will getting a faster CPU with smaller cache be worse in performance compared to the larger cache but slower processing speed?

Use for Photoshop and 3dstudiomax.

Any recommendation in CPU rendering please.!!

Quad-core...or... fast dual-core ?

More about : cpu cache size

September 26, 2008 5:28:53 AM

For rendering, Quad-core, definitely. And the faster processor will be faster, the difference in cache is negligible, especially in rendering.
September 26, 2008 6:21:09 AM

At the size the cache is, it really won't make that much of a difference.

Since it's actually 4mb (x2=8mb) per dual cores for the Q6600, and 3mb (x2=6mb) per dual cores for the Q9300, its actually 1mb difference per dual cores, since it's 2 dual cores stuck in one package.

Running it stock only, the Q9300 (higher clock speed) will out do the Q6600. So that is a no brainer. OC'ing it however, the Q6600 will do better on the higher end (Running DDR2 800 advertised speed), since OC'er are hindered by the Q9300 low multiplier.

Old article when the newer yorkies work coming out had a comparison for the Q9300 vs Q6600:

Core 2 Quad Q9300 vs. Core 2 Quad Q6600

That chart pretty much shows the stock speed comparisons.
Related resources
September 26, 2008 7:47:11 AM

Okay great... thank you...
So is the Q9300 a wise investment with new cpu's coming out in the somewhat near future..?

Im still planning a build ..So will it be best to wait?
September 26, 2008 8:00:24 AM

Price performance wise:

Q9300 $260
Q6600 $190

$70 bucks for 3-11% (depending on the app) performance increase because of 100mhz (die shrink), and perhaps if SSE4 is used at Stock.

That changes if you OC the Q6600 to 3.2-3.6ghz, which the Q9300 can basically go 3ghz at advertised speed of DDR2 800. To push it harder, just puts more stress on the chipset.

I'd say its best to wait, or get the Q6600 now with the intention to OC it. especially if you could get your hands on a Q9550 for a cheaper price when Nehalem comes out.
September 26, 2008 8:19:12 AM

So wait for the ..... the Intel Core i7 920....? The new budget end CPU coming

Or is getting a Q6600 and OC, a better way to go>?
September 26, 2008 9:00:57 AM

Q6600 now, with the intention of OC'ing it, if you want to build a system now.

If you want to stay with the 775 socket, I'd wait for the Q9550 prices to come down, or if the price is more attractive for the Q9300, and if 3ghz OC will suit you fine, then wait for that might be something for ya.

As for the i7, you will need a new MB for that, and perhaps if you want to run DDR3 memory, even though the price on that i7 chip might be attractive as well. I only mention Nehalem, since that chip may push the other prices down.

It really just boils down to how much you want to spend, and how much time your willing to wait.
September 26, 2008 10:44:44 AM

Get the Q6600 and OC it, the Q9300 is useless in a world where a Q6600 is much cheaper than it. At least that is what I think.
!