📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

quck laptop l2 cache question

what's better - small l2 cache (512) and big fsb 3200mhz

or big cache (1mb) and small fsb 800mhz ?

thanks in advance
Karma is a wonderful thing. ;)

Comments

  • esuhl
    esuhl Posts: 9,409
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite
    I think the FSB (front side bus) connects the CPU to the northbridge (memory controller), while the L2 cache is used by the CPU to buffer memory contents. So with a 512kB L2 cache + 3.2GHz FSB, half the number of data can be cached, but the cache can be replenished four times (3200/800) times as quickly.

    So I'd guess that a program that uses the CPU continuously (maybe something like video encoding, image processing, mathematical computation, etc.) would run faster with a 3.2GHz FSB, since the L2 cache would soon be emptied and the FSB would be the limiting factor in transferring data to the CPU; but a program that intermittently used CPU cycles might perform better with the 1MB L2 cache.
  • ddoris
    ddoris Posts: 392 Forumite
    You won't have 3200fsb for a while.
    You are getting confused - why don't you approach this in a simpler way and simply look up the 2 cpu in a benchmark list ?

    Eg http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php - there are others .

    Then you have another question - does l2 matter much/how important is l2 cache ? The answer depends on what the cpu is doing.
  • Hammyman
    Hammyman Posts: 9,913 Forumite
    All other things being relatively equal, BIG CACHE. Biggest cache you can find. L2 cache has a large effect on performance.

    No such thing as a 3.2GHz FSB.
  • esuhl
    esuhl Posts: 9,409
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Forumite
    Hammyman wrote: »
    No such thing as a 3.2GHz FSB.

    I thought that sounded a bit odd!

    Several years ago, I remember opting for an AMD64 CPU because of the way that that these chips had a memory controller built in, so they could reference RAM directly without being limited by the speed of the FSB (if I remember rightly). I think Intel might have integrated memory controllers on the chip since around the time that the Core 2 Duo chips came out...
  • jonnyb
    jonnyb Posts: 601
    Part of the Furniture 500 Posts Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    http://www.cclonline.com/product-info.asp?product_id=57115&category_id=1050&manufacturer_id=0&tid=lx.ptq02.028

    I understand what you all say about the fsb, and 3200mhz being unattainable, but the link above mentions a bus speed of that figure.

    Am I misunderstanding it ?

    Thanks for the link to cpu benchmark ddoris.
    Karma is a wonderful thing. ;)
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 355.9K Banking & Borrowing
  • 255K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 456.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 248.4K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 606.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 179K Life & Family
  • 263.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.