Madshrimps Forum Madness - Intel Core 2 Duo Performance

Madshrimps Forum Madness (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/)

- WebNews (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/)

- - Intel Core 2 Duo Performance - L2 cache Sizes Compared (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/intel-core-2-duo-performance-l2-cache-sizes-compared-37378/)

jmke	9th September 2007 09:46

Intel Core 2 Duo Performance - L2 cache Sizes Compared

To elaborate further, you can remove all of the cache and make a really cheap processor. It will not only be very cheap, but also extremely slow. But how much does the second level of cache really influence and affect the performance of today's Core 2 Duo processors? We at NordicHardware have gathered three processors, with 4MB, 2MB and 1MB respectively, to investigate this more thoroughly.
http://nyhetsbrev.nordichardware.se/...rivelse--E-514

jmke	9th September 2007 09:49

Quote:

To believe that such small differences as a measly MB here or there makes anything but a marginal difference, in anything but synthetic tests, turns out to be completely foolish. Here we see performance differences of 15% to 22%. The 2MB model is relatively steady in between the other two, but the margin between the top and bottom model varies from game to game.

try running games not at 640x480, that will show different % :D

Xploited Titan

10th September 2007 07:14

He should have done three tests instead of one.

I mean, why compare with a benchmark without forcing the most out of em?

If a 1MB cache CPU can follow suit to a 2MB or 4MB, it means one isn't loading the CPU enough.

Sigh, he should at least have tried Far Cry or Bioshock at 1280x1024 (most used res as of now iirc) full graphics on.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:29.