amd 64 3000
am i right in saying that this chip comes with a 1mb l2 cache..i know it started off as 512 its jus im sure that somewhere ive seen amd 64 3000 with 1mb l2 cache. Also would you say that the k8t800 is a good motherboard for genreal use for overclocking? means that this chip isnt dual channel wud u say two 512's or 1 gig of 3700 ram? thanks
512mb corsair xms 3200
80 gig hd
512mb corsair xms 3200
80 gig hd
Yes the AMD 64 3000+ has the 1 MB of L2 cache. As for the ram, a single chip is mariginally faster than two chips if they are not in dual channel, but I doubt you will notice the difference.
Personally I think the dual channel makes a big difference. On my old computer I was using 2x256MB DDR2100, my motherboard crapped out on me, and so I purchased a new motherboard that supported dual channel, with the same ram with dual channel enabled, my PCMark 2002 score increased 500 points.
Also, I posted this in a another topic too, I have a computer with a 2800+ XP chip, and one with a 3000+ 64-bit chip, the 2800+ chip scores almost 900 points higher on PCMark 2002 than the 64-bit chip.
As far as the motherboard, I can't speak from expierence. My question is why? I have messed around with overclocking some just to learn, but I have never had a reason to overclock? I ran a 2100 chip for quite a while on all sorts of games, have recently upgraded to a 2800 chip, and have never run into any performance issues?
Actually, the 3000 only has 512 cache. At least that's the only version they sell at newegg, but I'm pretty sure 3200 was the lowest speed of A64 with the 1mb cache...
"It's too late now anyway. That song is stuck in my head and the only way to get rid of it is to blow it out. With a bullet!! - Carl
Quote:Also, I posted this in a another topic too, I have a computer with a 2800+ XP chip, and one with a 3000+ 64-bit chip, the 2800+ chip scores almost 900 points higher on PCMark 2002 than the 64-bit chip.
the reason for this is because it's a laptop, which probably has cool n quiet enabled.
512mb Kingmax ddr400
Sapphire 9800pro 128mb
10K WD Raptor
one more vote that AMD 64 3000+ is only 512k L2 cache.
Its been listed wrong alot of places. Just go check AMD's website mang.
www.amd.com or type amd and then press ctrl+enter. u get a nice pic of
an american who pisses the world off named Lance Armstrong. on a side-note
shouldn't amd name thier next chips Lance, and then Armstrong? That would
be awesome. We RULE BICYCLE PEDDLING IN FRENCH TOURS!!!!
AMD Athlon XP 2100+-=-1Gb PC2700-=-40Gb WDD HDD-=-
16x DvD-=-32x12x40 Lite on CD/RW-=-Floppy, "Who needs a damned floppy!"-=-ECS K7S5A Pro-=- Geforce 4 Ti 4400 128Mb 4x-=-
Cool'n'quiet is installed on the laptop, and for most things the CPU sits right about 800 mhz, during the benchmarking the CPU goes to the max clock speed.
My question is this though, shouldn't the processors be running at full potential during benchmarking? It scores no less than 5500 on PCMark02, which is really a pretty healthy score for a stock processor.
I haven't been able to find a way to disable this cool'n'quiet control though.
Athlon64 3000+ comes with 512kb L2 cache
nForce3 250 based mobos are good for overclocking
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A>
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>
>u get a nice pic of
>an american who pisses the world off named Lance Armstrong.
I just thought about this: too bad Lance actually dominated most of the tour, thereby wearing the yellow leaders-shirt which doesnt have any AMD's logo's on it LOL.
= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =