• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

512KB cache vs 1MB cache

K

Kyle W

Member
Thinkin about getting an HP but one has a 512KB cache and other is 1MB. Is it worth a 50buck diff? This is only about cache not about HP or building my own 🙂 Thank you.
 
im not sure with AMD i dont think the extre 512Kb cache = 200Mhz on core speed.

my friend had a 3200 clawhammer, and i had a 3200 Newcastle, he had the 1mb cache and 2ghz, i had 512kb cache and 2.2Ghz. my system usually beat his when it came to benchmarking. except in some situations which are cache intensive. but with the K8 pipeline not being particularly long it doesnt respond as well as intels P4's do to more cache.

in real life your not gonna know the difference, but for me id take the extra speed over the extra cache anyday
 
I might do some gaming...RTS/some RPG. DVD/CD burning, every day stuff nothing much unless I find something I wanna do heh so I dunno.
 
Depends on the chips... if you compare a 3700+ SD to a 3500+ Venice, there is not much performance difference at stock speeds but the 3700 overclocks better and runs cooler, so the choice is a pretty easy one.
 
Originally posted by: professor1942
Depends on the chips... if you compare a 3700+ SD to a 3500+ Venice, there is not much performance difference at stock speeds but the 3700 overclocks better and runs cooler, so the choice is a pretty easy one.
Click to expand...

Thats just it this computer is a HP/Compaq. 3700+ but I'm 100% sure you cant overclock cuz bios will be locked
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top