The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    2.2ghz 4M L2 VS 2.4 GHz 3M L2 Cache

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by hariprasad, Jul 12, 2008.

  1. hariprasad

    hariprasad Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    I'm trying to configure dell d630..

    for processor a 2.2ghz 4m L2 cache and 2.4 ghz 3m L2 cache are both at the same price.

    Which one offers better performance??

    Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T7500 (2.20GHz) 4M L2 Cache, 800MHz Dual Core [Included in Price]
    Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T8300 (2.40GHz) 3M L2 Cache, 800Mhz Dual Core add $0
     
    hariprasad, Jul 12, 2008
    #1
  2. royk50

    royk50 times being what they are

    Reputations:
    258
    Messages:
    1,975
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    thats not the only difference the t7500 is an older cpu, it consumes more power and heats up more.

    go with the t8300
     
    royk50, Jul 12, 2008
    #2
  3. Meemat

    Meemat Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    127
    Messages:
    462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    The 2.4 GHz w/3MB L2 should perform better since it has a higher clockspeed and is a Penryn (45nm fab vs. 65nm on the previous one) and it's supposed to take less power and give off less heat.

    From what I understand, these advantages outweigh the 1 MB of L2 cache (correct me if I'm wrong someone)
     
    Meemat, Jul 12, 2008
    #3
  4. arknsashilbilly

    arknsashilbilly Notebook Guru

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    Absolutely, going up to a higher clock speed and a smaller, more efficient penryn far outweighs 1 mb of L2 Cache
     
    arknsashilbilly, Jul 12, 2008
    #4
  5. flipfire

    flipfire Moderately Boss

    Reputations:
    6,156
    Messages:
    11,214
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    466
    Please do not cross-post, it is against forum rules. I have merged the two threads together.

    -flipfire
     
    flipfire, Jul 12, 2008
    #5
  6. hariprasad

    hariprasad Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    can you merge my question with graphics card too.. sry.. i'm not aware
     
    hariprasad, Jul 12, 2008
    #6
  7. flipfire

    flipfire Moderately Boss

    Reputations:
    6,156
    Messages:
    11,214
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    466
    I have deleted the duplicate threads. Theres no need to make a thread on every section.

    To answer your question here: Definately go with the T8300 for numerous reasons. Faster, cooler and less power consumption
     
    flipfire, Jul 12, 2008
    #7
  8. powerpack

    powerpack Notebook Prophet

    Reputations:
    7,101
    Messages:
    5,757
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As all have said T8300.

    For a little background. 2MB vs 4MB and 3MB vs 6MB comparisons have been done by AnandTech. 2MB vs 4MB at same clock. With sample applications average 3% to 4%. Max 10%. 3MB vs 6MB average 2% to 3% max 8%. A little guessing and the L2 advantage of 4MB vs 3MB is 1% to 2% average 4% max. 2.4 has 8% more clocks. T8300 is faster then always.

    On performance alone T8300 wins plus other advantages that have been pointed out.
     
    powerpack, Jul 12, 2008
    #8