Still dont understand AMD vs Intel

Status
Not open for further replies.
To answer the original question:

The clock frequency is not the whole story. What is important is the AMOUNT of "work" the computer can do in a given period of time.. Not how OFTEN you try to do "work" in that time..

Frequency=how OFTEN try to do work in a second = cycles / second

AMOUNT of work per second = frequency x work done "each time"
= (cycles / second) x (instructions/cycle)
= instructions / second

Hacp said:
Nope. Cache is important for Intel in gaming. AMD doesn't need it but intel defenetly needs it.

Dude, every system needs as much "cache" as it can get!. It's memory that can be accessed FAST, so that the CPU does not need to get it from the RAM - which is slower.. Which system would benefit "more" from cache depends on how fast/slow it is to access stuff from its RAM.. But in terms of "needing" it, you can never have too much of it :)
 
quad core CPU clocked at 5GHz each core with 5Gb L3 cache, 2.5Gb of L2 cache, and 1gb of L1 cache coming by 2006 :p
 
Nubius said:
quad core CPU clocked at 5GHz each core with 5Gb L3 cache, 2.5Gb of L2 cache, and 1gb of L1 cache coming by 2006 :p

holy crap, thats scary. 1 gig of L1!!! thats insane!
 
Don't forget 1tb/sec memory bandwidth
Thought that was a given.......everybody knows it has that much :p

What's the difference between L1 and L2?
it's the same technically, L1 is just accessed first, then L2, then L3 if your CPU has it, then RAM, then last is HD which of course is the slowest.
 
Traditionally, L1 was on the die, and L2 was not. The L2 was moved onto the die, and L3 cache was born, and place off the die (L1 was still faster then L2, because L2 is located farther away from the CPU. Because it has more space, L2 can be larger).

Finally, L3 was moved onboard the CPU (Only in more powerful, Server CPUs however). Again, its larger but slighlty cslower then L2 and L3.

Because AMD processors can hammer through more processes then intel CPUs at eqaul GHz, the chache is not as inportant.... its good, but the AMD simply does not NEED it.

Ofcurse, if you'd like AMD costs to skyrocket, you can ask AMD to put 2-3 MB of cache on each core. ^_^
 
Yes, that is true. That is why Celeron ds get killed by its low amount of cache while semprons don't witness the same performance drop.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom