CPU Cache Or GHZ is more important

[nickpokesyou]

CPU Cache Or GHZ is more important.

whats are the use for cache & GHZ?

[mvitkun]

it's more about the cpu architecture than either of those.

if your picking between cpu's of the same architecture then I'd say look in this order.

more cores.

higher clock speed.

more cache

[nickpokesyou]

at do u mean by cpu architecture

[mvitkun]

at do u mean by cpu architecture

the innerworkings of the cpu.

transistor count,features like integrated memory controllers,things like the tri-gate transistor used on ivybridge.

innovations in the cpu's inner workings that improved performance.

basically the stuff people don't care about.

simply look for reviews like guru3d,anandtech,tomshardware,etc and look for the part where they compare the cpu to other cpu's performance.

[Helltech]

at do u mean by cpu architecture

In layman's terms, it is something you can only compare via benchmarks, and not specifications.

[nickpokesyou]

so is GHZ more important or Cache?

[ercineker]

think of it like this... the cpu is the engine and how many cylinder is the gigahertz but the size of the engine is the cache memory size... cache memory is used to store information to be processed and the results as well, so too big of a cache wudnt affect the performance drasticly... gigahertz/cache size is generally proportional so the end product is optimal :)

hope i clear it a little :D

[Glenwing]

GHz is more important than cache, but you can only really use these things to compare processors that are the same architecture. For example, comparing two Sandy Bridge processors the one with the higher clock speed will be faster (if they have the same number of cores, if they have different core counts it depends on what you're doing for which one is faster). However in between CPUs that are different, you cannot compare with specs and numbers like these. A 3.5GHz Ivy Bridge Hyper-Threaded Quad Core is faster than a 3.5GHz Sandy Bridge Hyper-Threaded Quad Core because it has a higher performing underlying architecture. Similarly, an AMD Phenom II X4 965 (3.4GHz, Quad-Core, 6MB Cache) is completely annihilated by an Intel Core i5-3570K (3.4GHz, Quad-Core, 6MB Cache) because the architecture on the Intel is newer and much better than the older Phenom II. Clock speed and Cache are only useful for comparing processors that are otherwise the same, most importantly from the same maker, generation, and series. Otherwise, a CPUs performance really can't be determined from its specifications. You will have to look at benchmark results on various review websites.

[nickpokesyou]

Thanks @ercineker & @ glenwing, makes me know more about CPU

[Warrax]

Cache won't help much even with CPUs of the same architecture. Take the i5 3570k and the i7 3770k for example, the i7 3770k has 8mb of L3 cache vs 6mb for the i5 3570k. If you disable hyperthreading on the i7 3770k and reduce the MHZ to the same as the i5 3570k and benchmark both of them, the 3770k will usually be like 1% faster because of the 2 extra MB of cache, so it's not much. The difference is more noticeable if you compare a cpu without L3 cache with a cpu with it but the increase is still not as good as more MHZ.

[nickpokesyou]

@warrax. i see thanks :)

[Dark_Nemesis]

Basically, the only way to compare diifferent CPU's is to check out performance charts, based on what you will be using it for. Below link to tomshardware cpu charts, that illustrate what Glenwing just wrote.