[mdlug] L1 & L2 Cache AMD & Intel
David Lane
dcl400m at yahoo.com
Tue Feb 19 10:53:54 EST 2008
Currently I'm building a home office infrastructure, and I'm taking a good look at CPU's. It seems that Intel offers CPU's with more L2 cache. And the Q6600 is a good example and runs about $250 OEM +/- where the AMD Phenom starts at 199.00. Both have 128k L1 cache, but the Intel Q6700 has 4M L2 Cache in addition to 128k L1 But is a wopping $539.00
I do Have E6600 and E6400 Intel chips and am very happy with them. The E6600 runs Open Suse 10.3 and the E6400 runs Windows XP (yes, there are a hand full of application that run only on windows that I need). Both with good SATA hard drives are quite responsive.
The Techs tell me that the cache helps make the system faster, and that is the $300 difference in the Q6600 and the Q6700. Currently I'm happy with my E6400 & E6600.
Does any know what performance yield is the extra cache on the Q6700?
David C. Lane
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
More information about the mdlug
mailing list