1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

1mb L2 cache vs 512mb cache

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by lolzantz, 19 Aug 2004.

  1. lolzantz

    lolzantz What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    9 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sup guys,

    I just ordered a Amd Athlon64 3200+ and the site told me that i would be getting either the 1mb cache or the 512mb L2 cache version. Which one do u think is better? Which would would you prefer. I know that the 512mb is a new castle core and has a faster clock 2.2ghz i believe as opposed to the clawhammer which is 2.01ghz. Anyway hopefully it doesn't make a really big difference.
     
  2. Carbon

    Carbon Banned

    Joined:
    8 Jan 2003
    Posts:
    1,912
    Likes Received:
    2
    you mean 512kb version? not 512mb version?
     
  3. lolzantz

    lolzantz What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    9 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    wow

    yea i mean k sorry =P
     
  4. Austin

    Austin Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    14
    :duh: The 512k one is clocked higher and tends to slightly outperform the lower clocked 1MB version. However IF both could o/c without mobo, RAM etc limiting them then the 1MB one would then be faster, but because the 512k one comes higher clocked by default it can reach higher speeds without pushing the mobo, RAM etc too far. Then there's the point that 1MB L2 should be most beneficial when operating in 64bit mode. So bottom line, it doesn't matter as both have their pros and cons.
     
  5. rio2

    rio2 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    8 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    the new version of socket 939 is very high performance and the difference is very low,the version with 512kb of L2 is good for overclock.and the cost is low (respectly at 1mb version). :D
     
  6. lolzantz

    lolzantz What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    9 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    which 3200+ would you guys prefer? The 512k or 1mb L2 cache?
     
  7. Austin

    Austin Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    14
    ;) It doesn't matter as each is equally good with its own merits and minor drawbacks. What are big factors for you ... o/c'ing perhaps? How far would you be willing to go and with what RAM and mobo would it be?
     
  8. zapf

    zapf What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    17 Aug 2004
    Posts:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    im getting a clawhammer not a newcastle....will the 200mhz make that much of a difference? and future-wise, i think the cache may help...although I may be totally wrong here....
     
  9. Austin

    Austin Minimodder

    Joined:
    16 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    2,029
    Likes Received:
    14
    :hip: The extra 200mhz tends to help the 512k CPU out-perform the slower 1MB one but it's never by much at all. The biggest benefit to the cache is likely to come when it can operate in 64bit mode, we'll have to see how that works out in practice though. With the right mobo and RAM the 1MB has the advantage of being a better performing o/c'er.
     

Share This Page