Dual Core Cache

[Chops]

You guys have given me the dual core bug... but I have a question:

Does 1mb of L2 compared to 2mb of L2 make a noticable difference? I'm looking at the 3800+ X2 and Opteron 165. I'm leaning towards the X2 because it's cheaper, has a 10x multi vs a 9x multi, and supposedly overclocks just as well. Is the extra cache going to be worth it?

 

[arman01]

i was faced with the same decision....i went with an Opteron 165 in my Asus A8N-SLI Premium.

Its been going pretty good, and definitely more responsive then my Athlon 64 3000+ winchester...

from what i know the extra cache comes in handy for video editing/encoding etc.....and maybe future games..

Another reason to get the Opteron is that they can overclock pretty well...im currently at 2.4Ghz stable at stock voltage

 

[drizzt81]

It depends what you are going to do. Some applications benefit more from additional cache than others.

 

[tsuehpsyde]

Another reason to get the Opteron is that they can overclock pretty well...im currently at 2.4Ghz stable at stock voltage

Meh, I overclocked my friend's X2 3800+ for him, and he got the same result. 2.4GHz on stock voltage, and it probably can up to like 2.45GHz. If the 165 was the same price or cheaper it'd be worth it (like when Monarch had them for $277 shipped, still kickin' myself for not getting one then), but I still think the X2 3800+ makes the most sense. The extra cache is nice, but I'm not all that certain it's needed in dual-cores. The 3800+ I used was fluid in everything, before and after overclock.

Full Folding Ahead!

 

[cooter]

From most benchmarks I have seen, a small bump in clock is worth alot more then the added cache. There is very little benefit.

 

[burningrave101]

From most benchmarks I have seen, a small bump in clock is worth alot more then the added cache. There is very little benefit.

Well you do have to take into account that benchmarks in reviews only cover a very few of the applications and games currently avaiable.