Level 2 Cache Size Question?

[mad0maxx]

Is there a significant difference between 1MB vs 2MB level 2 cache?

Thanks

 

[Amaroque]

Depends on what you're doing.

 

[StrangerGuy]

If you are talking about P4 5xx vs 6xx, the extra 1MB cache only gives the 6xx a tiny amount of performance increase.

 

[Acanthus]

no.

 

[BrownTown]

L2 cache size should make a big difference in some apps. Also, keep in mind that going from Prescott to Prescott-2M they also increased cache latantcy which gets rid of most of the advantage of having the larger cache. IF you double the size of the cache and keep the latentcy the same then you should see some decent improvement in many applications.

 

[mad0maxx]

I was mainly looking at the AMD Athlon X2 4200 (with 1MB lvl2 cache) vs the AMD Athlon X2 4400 (with 2MB lvl2 cache)... sorry I should of specified more... ^_^

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: BrownTown
L2 cache size should make a big difference in some apps. Also, keep in mind that going from Prescott to Prescott-2M they also increased cache latantcy which gets rid of most of the advantage of having the larger cache. IF you double the size of the cache and keep the latentcy the same then you should see some decent improvement in many applications.

Show me one application, that isnt a synthetic benchmark, where you see a tangible increase...

Tangible of course being worth increased cost.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: mad0maxx
I was mainly looking at the AMD Athlon X2 4200 (with 1MB lvl2 cache) vs the AMD Athlon X2 4400 (with 2MB lvl2 cache)... sorry I should of specified more... ^_^

But in this case the cache is not shared (unified) so it doesn?t work like you think. The cache is individually assigned to each core.

So your looking at either 512KB or 1MB In this scenario, and 1MB is always going to be better.

Will you see much of an improvement? Well I?m not sure that you actually do. Games possibly.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: BrownTown
L2 cache size should make a big difference in some apps. Also, keep in mind that going from Prescott to Prescott-2M they also increased cache latantcy which gets rid of most of the advantage of having the larger cache. IF you double the size of the cache and keep the latentcy the same then you should see some decent improvement in many applications.

Show me one application, that isnt a synthetic benchmark, where you see a tangible increase...

Tangible of course being worth increased cost.

That?s right apps won?t see a linear performance increase like benchies will. This is a common misconception.

I think it is the same argument with 1GB and 2GB. Certain apps by design work better or more efficiently with more RAM or cache, and some don?t see any benefit.

BF2 for example, when fully maxed out and running high res, 2GB comes in very handy. It?s the same with large database servers having access to a lot of memory for database number crunching rather than using HDD?s slow I/O. In this scenario the sky?s the limit with regards to amount of RAM against database size.

Anyway on the flip side you don?t need 2GB?s of RAM to play solitaire.

 

[Amaroque]

If you're on a budget, I'd spend the money on (insert component here) before L2 cache.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: Amaroque
If you're on a budget, I'd spend the money on (BEER) before L2 cache.

 

[Amaroque]

Originally posted by: RichUK

Originally posted by: Amaroque
If you're on a budget, I'd spend the money on (BEER) before L2 cache.

:laugh: :beer: :thumbsup: