Simple processor choice...

[The549]

They're both 89W, one has a one meg L2 cache at 3.2GHz, the other 2X1meg L2 cache at 3GHz.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103233

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103272

 

[RudeCurve]

I'd take the one with more cache. You're not going to notice any speed difference in 200MHz higher clock.

 

[Bludd]

I agree with RudeCurve.

 

[Davros]

since the 6000 is a rating of speed they should be the same overall

 

[The549]

I'm thinking more cache as well. Thanks. May be able to oc as well.

 

[Skrying]

The 2x 1MB of cache is 90nm, the 3.1Ghz is 65nm. I'd seriously look into which is the better known overclocker before buying as personally that's what I'd base my decision on.

 

[RudeCurve]

Yeah if you're going to OC then the 65nm chip might be better depending on how far you want/able to OC it.

 

[Randell]

what is your current processor? I'd seriously consider just saving up and making the switch to a C2D system.

 

[The549]

AMD x2 4600 at 2.4GHz

 

[Skrying]

Seems like a bit of a waste then to be honest.

 

[ShaidarHaran]

Seems like a bit of a waste then to be honest.

Given how cheap these chips are I think it's a worthwhile upgrade.

For the record:

Windsor > Brisbane

 

[epicstruggle]

Seems like a bit of a waste then to be honest.

I agree, save the money and make the upgrade a big one when more money has been saved.

 

[ShaidarHaran]

$90 for a drop-in upgrade that will boost performance by 30% or more over the OP's existing configuration is hardly a waste of money.

Not everyone has tons of money laying around to throw at a new system, guys.

 

[Skrying]

$90 for a drop-in upgrade that will boost performance by 30% or more over the OP's existing configuration is hardly a waste of money.

Not everyone has tons of money laying around to throw at a new system, guys.

Yet you're suggesting throwing money on something that is NOT that big of an upgrade... Odd considering others have suggest SAVING UP for the system.

 

[Blazkowicz]

the 90nm might overclock higher, while the 65nm should heat less.
if you don't o/c, you can either get the 65nm, wait for another upgrade or try to o/c that 4600+ (not terribly complicated as long as you test for stability).

a yet to be released 45nm X2 would be a good upgrade too (with the new process and K10 architectural improvements they should be similar to a C2D)

 

[The549]

Well, I have an AM2 slot, and a C2D would be many months down the line if I wait. I read somewhere that using an AM2 with the new processors will limit memory bandwidth or something...I'm not sure at this point what I'll do. I'm thinking that a few of my games will be a bit smoother with a faster proc.

 

[ShaidarHaran]

Yet you're suggesting throwing money on something that is NOT that big of an upgrade... Odd considering others have suggest SAVING UP for the system.

30% performance improvement.

$90.

Drop the attitude.

 

[Blazkowicz]

I read somewhere that using an AM2 with the new processors will limit memory bandwidth or something...I'm not sure at this point what I'll do.

that's not a real issue. if you're thinking about AM2+, the bigger hypertransport bandwith is only useful for integrated video. if you're thinking about AM3 (AM3 processors will fit in AM2 socket), yes an AM3 mobo with DDR3 will give bigger memory bandwith.

But it's not terribly important either (Intel's i7 is funny : triple channel doesn't buy anything over double channel).

 

[Skrying]

30% performance improvement.

$90.

Drop the attitude.

No such thing as an across the board 30% performance improvement.

 

[ShaidarHaran]

No such thing as an across the board 30% performance improvement.

Pick a benchmark

30% (or more) in CPU-bound apps, and 20-30% in games.