How Much Cash for that Cache? AMD do not want you to have 1Mb cache
So what makes, say, a 2.0GHz 4000+ X2 worth almost twice as much as a 2.0GHz 3800+ X2, or a single-core 2.2GHz 3700+ worth as much as a dual-core 4200+, or more than twice as much as a single-core 2.2GHz 3500+?
The answer is: 512K cache.
What AMD is doing is slashing the prices on CPUs that have 512K cache per core, while leaving the prices on any chips that have 1Mb cache alone.
Cache = cash
512K Cache = OEM machines
*hugs his 4440+*
reason is simple, in a pricewar costs are essential and the costs of 1MB chips are significantly higher because you get less chips per wafer and you get more distribution costs
AMD preparing for pricewar is confirmed with this move
Hell, look at Newegg today.
A64 Venice 3000+ $95.50
Venice 3200+ $99
Am2 pricing is not far ahead. With a $150 7600GT and a decent MB, you will have a damn good system.
considering the use of dualcore by future games, the 805 D still PWNS the low end Venice
considering that still being more than 1-2 years away, plenty of time to upgrade the CPU afterwards:p
well, I enjoy dualocre action right now and there are plenty of people reporting their general windows usage is kinda crappy with with singlecore A64 compared to HT CPUs and dualcores
I have Intel HT, A64 Dualcore and A64 single core running; except for real multi-thread usage which I do infrequently, general apps seem faster with single core contrary to others.
you were referring to games Rutar, not apps:)
right now 1 core is plenty fast for current games but in the future when more power is needed the second core gets handy therfore it's more futureproof than a singlecore
right now, the benfits in general windows usage are already there
|All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:03.|
Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO