AMD or INTEL

[Luihed]

---

The only advantage that intel had over AMD was their 512k of cache.... with the Bartons having the same cache as Intel now, AMD is the clear winner....

[werty]

if only intel had lower prices....

[bitzerlitzer]

Just got my new notebook computer with the Intel Pentium 4 (2.53Ghz) and perfectly happy with it and yes, it runs cool too.

[BeNZ]

The only advantage that intel had over AMD was their 512k of cache.... with the Bartons having the same cache as Intel now, AMD is the clear winner....

ha, i agree, considering that AMD has 128k of L1 cache on it's current processors now.

[werty]

hmmm.... more CACHE equals QUAKE3?

[Luihed]

Hopefully those 2500+ Bartons will only be around $150 by summertime......

[BeoR]

hopefully they'll arrive here before the ClawHammer is released...

[CrasHBURN]

The only advantage that intel had over AMD was their 512k of cache.... with the Bartons having the same cache as Intel now, AMD is the clear winner....

ha, i agree, considering that AMD has 128k of L1 cache on it's current processors now.

512KB is L2 Cache.. ang L2 man ang gamit kaayo... Duron has only 64KB L2 and Thunderbird/Palomino XPs have 256KB L2...

[BeNZ]

yah, 512k is L2, but as of now, the AMD Athlon 4 has 128 L1 Cache and 256K on-die L2 Cache, 200MHz and the AMD Duron has 128k L1 - 64k on-die L2 , 200MHz , i've read this on laptop magazine.

So based on Luihed statement, AMD would lead. that if, based on current specifications, AMD would maintain it's L1 to 128k and beef up their L2 to 512k.

" AMD Athlon 4 : 128 L1 Cache and 256K on-die L2 Cache, 200MHz
AMD Duron : 128k L1 - 64k on-die L2 , 200MHz

Intel Pentium 4 : 20k L1 - 512k on-die L2 , 400MHz
Intel Pentium 4M: 12k L1 - 512k on-die L2 , 400MHz

Intel Pentium III : 32k L1, 256k on-die L2 , 100 or 133 MHz
Intel Pentium IIIM : 32k L1 , 512k L2 , 133 MHz "

anyway, i'll try to double check.

[BeNZ]

about the L1 and L2 cache.

Level 1 or primary cache is the fastest memory on the PC. It is in fact, built directly into the processor itself. This cache is very small, generally from 8 KB for old CPU's to 64 KB, now 128k, but it is extremely fast; it runs at the same speed as the processor. If the processor requests information and can find it in the level 1 cache, that is the best case, because the information is there immediately and the system does not have to wait.

Lastest CPU have the L2 built-in into the CPU , more like the L1, we started seeing this on Pentium II's i think.

The level 2 cache is a secondary cache to the level 1 cache, and is larger and slightly slower. It is used to catch recent accesses that are not caught by the level 1 cache, and is usually 64 KB to 2 MB in size. Level 2 cache is usually found either on the motherboard or a daughterboard that inserts into the motherboard [ see old mobos with L2 on cards? or on mobos for Pentium 1 where you see L2's on the mobo itself? that's it.].

Pentium Pro processors actually have the level 2 cache in the same package as the processor itself (though it isn't in the same circuit where the processor and level 1 cache are) which means it runs much faster than level 2 cache that is separate and resides on the motherboard. Pentium II processors are in the middle; their cache runs at half the speed of the CPU.

Cache is in some ways a really amazing technology. A 512 KB level 2 cache, caching 64 MB of system memory, can supply the information that the processor requests 90-95% of the time. Think about the ratios here: the level 2 cache is less than 1% [.08% ] of the size of the memory it is caching [64mb ], but it is able to register a "hit" on over 90% of requests. That's pretty efficient, and is the reason why caching is so important.

and why BURNs says L2 is gamit kaayo.

overall, based on Luihed's statement - and on BURN's L2 statement, AMD would seem's to lead the CPU war as for this time. Feb. 18, 2003