On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 02:25:31 -0500,
ultimax35@hotmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (Jango) wrote:
>I was wondering whats the difference between a 1mb cache compared to a
>2mb cache in a pentium 3.2 ghz processor. Is it a major performance
>difference? Should every new computer come with the 2mb cache or 1mb
>cache? Does it really matter?
No, not a major difference but it does help a little.
Essentially, they had "extra" room in the core to add more
cache when they shrunk the core again, and more cache means
keeping a tight multi-layered design while still having a
higher surface area to couple with the heatsink (or heat
spreader as the case may be) for cooling. It's a win-win
situation for stock speed use. "Sometimes" overclocking
will be more limited with a larger cache but that is weighed
against that small performance benefit of the larger cache.
Larger cache is desirable, but MOST desirable at lesser
cache levels. It makes much more difference to go from 128K
to 256K on a Celeron than 1MB to 2MB on a P4.
Pentium Processors. 
Linear Mode
