Skip to main content

Does Cache Size Really Boost Performance?

Test Setup

Plattform
CPU IIntel Pentium Dual Core E2160 (65nm ; 1200 MHz, 1 MB L2 Cache)clocked at 2.4 GHz (266 MHz x9)
CPU IIIntel Core 2 Duo E4400 (65nm ; 2000 MHz, 2 MB L2 Cache)clocked at 2.4 GHz (266 MHz x9)
CPU IIIIntel Core 2 Duo X6800 (65nm ; 3000 MHz, 4 MB L2 Cache)clocked at 2.4 GHz (266 MHz x9)
MotherboardASUS Blitz Formula, Rev : 1.0Chipset : Intel P35, BIOS 1101
RAMCorsair CM2X1024-888C4D2x 1024 MB DDR2-800 (CL 4-4-4-12 2T)
Hard Disk DriveWestern Digital Raptor WD1500ADFD150 GB, 10.000 RPM, 16 MB cache, SATA/150
DVD-ROMSamsung SH-S183
Graphics CardZotac Geforce 8800 GTSGPU : Geforce 8800 GTS (500 MHz)RAM : 320 MB GDDR3 (1600 MHz)
Sound CardIntegrated
Power SupplyEnermax EG565P-VEATX 2.01, 510 Watt
System Software & Drivers
OSWindows XP Professional 5.10.2600, Service Pack 2
DirectX Version9.0c (4.09.0000.0904)
Platform Drivers IntelVersion 8.3.1013
Graphics Drivers NvidiaForceware 162.18

Benchmarks And Settings

Benchmarks and Settings
3D-Games
Call Of Duty 2Version : 1.3 RetailVideo Mode : 1280x960Anti Aliasing : offGraphics Card : mediumTimedemo demo2
PreyVersion : 1.3Video Mode : 1280x1024Video Quality : game defaultVsync = offBenchmark : THG-Demo
Quake 4Version : 1.2 (Dual-Core Patch)Video Mode : 1280x1024Video Quality : highTHG Timedemo waste.maptimedemo demo8.demo 1 (1 = load textures)
Audio
Lame MP3Version 3.98 Beta 5Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 53 minwave to mp3160 kbps
Video
TMPEG 3.0 ExpressVersion : 3.0.4.24 (no Audio)fist 5 Minutes DVD Terminator 2 SE (704x576) 16:9Multithreading by rendering
DivX 6.6Version : 6.6 (4 Logical CPUs)Profile : High Definition Profile1-pass, 3000 kbit/sEncoding mode : Insane QualityEnhanced multithreadingno Audio
XviD 1.1.3Version : 1.1.3Target qantizer : 1.00
Mainconcept H.264 v2Version 2.1260 MB MPEG-2 source (1920x1080) 16:9Codec : H.264Mode : NTSCAudio : AACProfile : HighStream : Program
Applications
WinrarVersion 3.70(303 MB, 47 Files, 2 Folders)Compression = BestDictionary = 4096 kB
Autodesk 3D Studio MaxVersion : 8.0Characters "Dragon_Charater_rig"rendering HTDV 1920x1080
CinebenchVersion : R101 CPU, x CPU run
Synthetics
PCMark05 ProVersion : 1.2.0CPU and Memory TestsWindows Media Player 10.00.00.3646Windows Media Encoder 9.00.00.2980
  • enzo matrix
    this is awesome
    Reply
  • Mousemonkey
    9497347 said:
    this is awesome
    It's taken you two years for that? :p
    Reply
  • HansVonOhain
    Great article. :D
    Reply
  • I like, it was helpfull read. no one could addord core 2 duo's in 2007 now we can, I didnt see yourcomment in 2007 HansVonOhain.
    Reply
  • I really loved this article.

    Thx "tomshardware" :)
    Reply
  • Memory were all so cheap all of a suddenly
    Reply
  • blueme
    Nice review!

    ~3 years ago I had the E8300 2.83 Ghz with 6MB cache for ~200$
    Now I have the E3200 with 1MB cache, overclocked at 2.88 for 20$

    The performance difference is negligible at best, especially considering the price. And although the E8400 doesn't cost that much, it's still around ~80$ used.
    Reply
  • isidroco
    I disagree with the conclusion, CACHE size does NOT matter, most cases are with less than 10% (with a max of 15% in winrar) difference between 1mb and 4mb. 10% is too little to be noticed in real world applications, there is no difference in waiting 9 or 10 seconds...
    Reply