AMD two Turions. RM 70 vs RM 82

What do you think? If all other factors are equal do you think there will be a noticeable difference in any way, or does it just sound good on paper?

 

Looks like 400 Mhz and 2 mb L2 cache instead of 1 mb. I'd guess it would be about a 25% CPU performance difference.

 

What will you be doing? For many both will work fine. Others might need the extra power. RM82 is more powerful than RM70.

 

The Rm-82 is definitely the better chip, but I think the cache size difference makes no difference, as AMD's are more efficient at using their cache, so say if their was am Rm-70 with 1mb of cache, and a RM-70 with 2mb of cache, the one with 2mb of cache may only be like 5% faster.
If it was an Intel processor, that increase from 1 to 2mb of cache would give a much greater performance increase.

the real only difference between the chips is their clock speed, so either will be good. Go for the RM-82 if it is not much more expensive

K-TRON

 

In their older lines, AMD counted the additional cache as worth a speed bump or 200 Mhz. We're going from a base of 1.6 Ghz, so the cache improvement should be more like about 10%.

A diagram that I just looked at had main memory latencies around 60 cycles on an Opteron. I think that L2 latencies are 12 or 13 cycles so you're still getting a good bang for the cache buck in going for more L2.

 

In this case I will be doing some light gaming plus movie watching, digital image processing and the usual office stuff.

 

I'd go with the faster model. I have an X2 5600+ desktop (2.8 Ghz 2 MB cache), an X2 4400+ (2.2 Ghz, 2 MB cache) and Athlon64 3200+ (2.0 Ghz 1 MB cache). I find the 5600+ provides pretty good performance. I wasn't that impressed with the X2 4400+. The 3200+ is in an old laptop (2004) and it's just used for the display. AMD has done very little with their Turion line in the last four years.