C2D reccomendations

Biffa · 18 Jun 2007 at 10:33

Logic tells me that the more L2 cache the better for crunching. But does it really make that much difference with the C2D's nowdays? I assume the cache is split per core.

C2D 2XXX has 1MB Cache (512K per core)
CD2 4XXX has 2MB Cache (1MB per core)
CD2 6XXX has 4MB Cache (2MB per core)
All the quads obviously have 8MB cache (2MB per core)

Whats your experience so far? Does it make that much difference?

SiriusB · 18 Jun 2007 at 11:22

As far as I know not immensely. People get good results on just about any modern CPU so just go with what you can afford

rich99million · 18 Jun 2007 at 11:30

I know my X2 with 512KB per core suffers on the larger SMP units due to them being benched on a CPU with 2MB per core - I was only getting 500ish PPD as opposed to 900ish PPD for WUs which were less cache intensive.

Of course that's apples vs. oranges, some data from C2D owners would be better.

shadowscotland · 18 Jun 2007 at 12:21

Some of the units (2610 especially) are very cashe dependant.
I'd say the E6320 or E6420 is the best bet and Oc them to the max.
Also stick with Intel 965/975 chipset. It looks as if the via and nvidia are ~10% slower at folding.
No idea on the P65 chipset.

Snapshot · 18 Jun 2007 at 16:39

Cache definitely makes a difference with 2610s - 15 min per frame on a stock E6600, 20 min per frame on an E6400 clocked at 2.4GHz.