Main > Main Forum

cpu L2 cache size?

(1/2) > >>

SpeedEng:
ok Im about to pick up a q9400 to upgrade the wifes pc

so that leaves me with either a e6550 (4mb l2)
or e2160 (1mb) for my mame box

the e6550 will be stuck at 333fsb (due to mb max fsb) = 2330 mhz
e2160 will be oced to 333 fsb = 3 ghz

now im lazy and hate applyin artic grease over and over
so should I stick with the e2160 or upgrade to e6550 due to the larger L2?

u_rebelscum:
3.0 Ghz vs 2.33 Ghz, both core 2 duos?  AFAIK, mame ==> 3.0 GHz is the way to go.

SavannahLion:

--- Quote from: u_rebelscum on February 02, 2009, 03:06:28 pm ---3.0 Ghz vs 2.33 Ghz, both core 2 duos?  AFAIK, mame ==> 3.0 GHz is the way to go.

--- End quote ---

Uh... the OP didn't make it sound like he was buying for a MAME computer, he was buying for his wife.

MrMojoZ:

--- Quote from: SavannahLion on February 02, 2009, 03:30:58 pm ---Uh... the OP didn't make it sound like he was buying for a MAME computer, he was buying for his wife.

--- End quote ---

The chip he was buying isn't being discussed, he already owns the two rebel mentioned.

SavannahLion:

--- Quote from: MrMojoZ on February 02, 2009, 04:37:37 pm ---
--- Quote from: SavannahLion on February 02, 2009, 03:30:58 pm ---Uh... the OP didn't make it sound like he was buying for a MAME computer, he was buying for his wife.

--- End quote ---

The chip he was buying isn't being discussed, he already owns the two rebel mentioned.

--- End quote ---

Oops, you're right. I misread the OP post.

In that case, has anybody done any testing on CPU's with different cache under MAME?

By my rough calculations, an OCed E2160 1MB would be about 12% faster on the cache than E6550. I confess I don't know a lot of key details about the Conroes.

It seems like E2160 is the new 300A so I would go with that. Unless someone knows of any test results with MAME and different cache sizes?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version