A64 3200 w 1mb cache question

Of the 2 which makes a better choice A64 3200 w 512 cache and 2.2 ghz speed or CO stepping 3200 with 1mb cache 2.0ghz speed.

I notice that the 1mb cache version appear to be discontinued is that correct. Does the extra 200mhz offset the larger cache and make the 512 version a better buy? I can buy this CO stepping at a decent price and it has been to 2.28 on stock vcore and air, so possibly is is being sold cause it will not or owner could not get it to go higher.

CK

The A64 with 1mb cache is better in terms of performance. The A64 with 512 cache is able to OC higher though, but you have to OC it at least 100 mhz to make up for the cache. In fact, to quote hitechjb1 from the sticky.

"It would take a NewCastle running 100-150 MHz faster, equivalent to 4-6% at 2.5 GHz level, to break even with a ClawHammer (when system running the same frequencies of memory and system bus) for average performance due to the difference in L2 cache size."

Shaitan said:

The A64 with 1mb cache is better in terms of performance. The A64 with 512 cache is able to OC higher though, but you have to OC it at least 100 mhz to make up for the cache. In fact, to quote hitechjb1 from the sticky.

"It would take a NewCastle running 100-150 MHz faster, equivalent to 4-6% at 2.5 GHz level, to break even with a ClawHammer (when system running the same frequencies of memory and system bus) for average performance due to the difference in L2 cache size."

Click to expand...

Kinda what i was thinking but how do the 1mb versions overclock on the whole are they known to be failry lame? Second what is reason for phasing the 1mb versions out?

What types of applications will the larger cache become more noticeable? Encoding video? Yes I have read the sticky it has an overwhelming amount of info, could read and read for a while I just gootta make a decision about buying this 3200 w 1mb cache quick.

CK

Cisco Kid said:

Kinda what i was thinking but how do the 1mb versions overclock on the whole are they known to be failry lame? Second what is reason for phasing the 1mb versions out?

What types of applications will the larger cache become more noticeable? Encoding video? Yes I have read the sticky it has an overwhelming amount of info, could read and read for a while I just gootta make a decision about buying this 3200 w 1mb cache quick.

CK

Click to expand...

ive had both. The 1mb was at 2400 mhz and got 35secs superpi. The newcastle needed 2600mhz to get 35secs superpi. The 1mb needed much more voltage and hit a wall way sooner than the newcastle.

and if you get any A64 it is always best to get CG rev.'s as they are usually the best OCer(claw, or castle)

i think its being phased out because it was more expensive.

overall, the NC are much better OC'ers, but not many people have a lot of different chips, most just have the same one, so we cant really tell which one is better. some people only get their NC upto 2.5ghz, my CH is running 2.45ghz 24/7, so mine has better performance than other NC's. most people dont get as high OC's with Clawhammers though so its safer to get a NC.

Thanks for the feedback guys the chip is a CO stepping so one of the older ones and as I editied into my thread it has reached 2.28 on stock vcore and air from what I see, and I assume stock cooling.

I know thats not a great overclock only 10% but there is a slim chance it may do better with higher vcore and better cooling. Since the price is right I figure I will give it a go. Also I have been told that 1mb cache may offer better performance with upcoming 64 bit software such as longhorn.

Last if the difference in cost between the 3200 above and a 3000 CG I can get that does 2.4 solid is $25 which would you choose? is it worth 425 to have the large 1 mb cache but possibly a slower chip, as I understand that if the 3000 is at 2.4 it will equal the 3200 at 2.2 roughly right?

Thanks for the feedback guys
CK