1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

    Dismiss Notice

Which Amd 939?

Discussion in 'CPUs' started by Darryn, 15 Aug 2006.

  1. Darryn

    Mobster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 4,414

    Location: Colne.... Up Norf.

    Ok another quick question,

    Which is the better of these two CPUs for photoshoppery and very very light gaming.

    AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4400+ 1mb cache 2.2ghz
    AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4600+ 512kb cache 2.4ghz

    Both the same price, is the cache going to make a big enough differance for my applications to offset the speed differance.

     
    Last edited: 15 Aug 2006
  2. Tetras

    Mobster

    Joined: 22 Jun 2006

    Posts: 3,745

  3. Darryn

    Mobster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 4,414

    Location: Colne.... Up Norf.

    Cheers, thats just what ive been looking for but couldnt find. :D
     
  4. Darryn

    Mobster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 4,414

    Location: Colne.... Up Norf.

    Ok another quick question,

    Which is the better of these two CPUs for photoshoppery and very very light gaming.

    AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4400+ 1mb cache 2.2ghz
    AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4600+ 512kb cache 2.4ghz

    Both the same price, is the cache going to make a big enough differance for my applications to offset the speed differance.
     
  5. Spyhop

    Soldato

    Joined: 16 May 2005

    Posts: 6,511

    Location: Cold waters

    From what I've read, don't let the cache fool you. Clock speed is more important.
     
  6. Tetras

    Mobster

    Joined: 22 Jun 2006

    Posts: 3,745

    But, cache is impossible to add, Mhz isn't, so for the same money I know what I'd go for ;)
     
  7. Darryn

    Mobster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 4,414

    Location: Colne.... Up Norf.

    Cheers guys, a quick google tends to agree with Tetras, and his explanation makes sense, I will be trying to push this chip quite hard. On the other hard folk seem to suggest that the 512kb makes the chip run a lot cooler :confused: Hmmmm...... I will sleep on it and order in the morning.
     
  8. matt1

    Mobster

    Joined: 2 May 2004

    Posts: 2,532

    Location: Nottingham

    Usually more cache means it runs a little hotter and is harder to overclock, if I were you I'd personally go for the 4400+ despite this. It's based on the Toledo core which is now apparently discontinued but I can see the extra cache being a nice plus. It may not overclock as well as the Manchester cores but will make up for it with cache, should hold it's value better than the Manchester based X2s aswell. If you are thinking about the 4600+ and overclocking, may aswell pickup a second hand 3800+ that does 2.8GHz :)