JareeB
Active Member
same here
AMD Phenom II VS. Intel Core i5
- Thread starter jonathanx54
- Start date
same here
2048Megabytes
Active Member
Cache is also referred as static random access memory (S-RAM). S-RAM is a small amount of memory that is much faster than primary storage RAM. It speeds overall computer performance by temporarily holding data the processor may use in the near future. There are three levels of cache. Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 (abbreviated L1, L2, and L3). Level 1 cache is faster than Level 2. Level 2 cache is faster than Level 3.
The Phenom II 945 specifications:
http://products.amd.com/en-us/Deskt...+SOI&f8=&f9=4000&f10=False&f11=False&f12=True
Phenom II 945
L1 Cache Size: 128 kilobytes x 4
L2 Cache Size: 512 kilobytes x 4
L3 Cache Size: 6144 kilobytes (or 6 megabytes)
The Phenom II Quad-Core processors have twice the Level 1 and Level 2 Cache of the Intel Core i5 but the Core i5 has more Level 3 cache than the Phenom II processors. So the Core i5 ends up with more cache over the Phenom II processors.
The Phenom II 945 specifications:
http://products.amd.com/en-us/Deskt...+SOI&f8=&f9=4000&f10=False&f11=False&f12=True
Phenom II 945
L1 Cache Size: 128 kilobytes x 4
L2 Cache Size: 512 kilobytes x 4
L3 Cache Size: 6144 kilobytes (or 6 megabytes)
The Phenom II Quad-Core processors have twice the Level 1 and Level 2 Cache of the Intel Core i5 but the Core i5 has more Level 3 cache than the Phenom II processors. So the Core i5 ends up with more cache over the Phenom II processors.
Thats what I thought but I wasn't positive so I didn't post it.
Research.
As another user explained, there's currently 3 levels of Cache, L1 L2 and L3. The L1 and L2 cache are allocated to each core, the L3 cache is common and shared between all 4 cores.
AMD PII 955-
L1-128kbx4= 512kb
L2-512kbx4= 2mb
L3-6mb
Grand total-8.5mb
I5 750-
L1-64kbx4-256kb
L2-256kbx4= 1mb
L3- 8mb
Grand total-9.25mb
So the I5 really only have 768kb of cache more than the Phenom II....but IMO the Phenom II is better having more cache allocated to each core.
Really? Did you miss my link?
http://anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3639&p=3
Whats that at the bottom of the list on pretty much every benchmark? Whoops it's the I5.
Last edited:
maroon1
New Member
These reviews show completely different thing
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3634&p=16
http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-870_9.html#sect0
http://techreport.com/articles.x/17545/6
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1060/14/
i5 750 had clear edge over Phenom 955 and the more expensive and power-hungry Phenom 965 in gaming
EDIT: And your review only shows 965BE performing better when using GTX 275, but when using HD4890 it didn't perform better than the cheaper i5 750
Last edited:
Ethan3.14159
Active Member
I would take a Phenom II just because the P55 platform is so ridiculously limited in terms of expandability. Only 16 lanes of PCI-e? Gimme a break.
Yeah we could both give plenty of links showing one is better than the other. You know what that means? They are about the same in performance.
A 965 is the same exact thing as a 955, simply take the multiplier on the 955 to 17 and bam you have a 965.
Using the gtx275 the 965 performs about 11-12 FPS better than the I5. Using the 4890 the I5 performs less than 1 FPS better than the 965 in both tests. So what. Like I said, just take the 955 to 17 multiplier and you have a 965. Same price as the I5 then.
Like I said, go I7 or go AMD. Those are the best options right now.
Last edited:
FATALiiTYz
New Member
Triple chnnle is over kill and getting sli or crossfire just hurts your powerbill. In my opinion its a bargain, plus it can Oc to 4.2ghz
Bodaggit23
Active Member
Most people won't care. One good GPU running at 16x is fine. You can still run two cards at 8x/8x. That won't bottleneck most cards anyway.