Very interesting article. http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10...

this article is every so slightly wrong. its always made a diffrence and not just a little. good examples the celeron is about 3 clock speeds behind a processor of similar clock speed and the barton processors kicked the arse off the other proceessor due to more memory. the more memory the better the processor. the memory on the ide has always been the bottle neck that throttles the performace of the processor. as the clock speed goes up the rule is more relevant. all text needs typos. There there for the reader to find,to distract them from the total lack of content. google it! wasnt the answer to the question i asked so dont be dense and give me that repl

It depends upon what programs you are using. It's not going to make aa diff if you aren't using any programs that are taking large amounts of resouces. So they are right. If you are just doing avg things on a pc it's not going to make a diff. I mean it's not going to laod web pages up any faster or word processing any quicker etc... But it will help with Video encoding and rendering of any nature.

ok follow up ive thought about it even more. so say in the future the processor can process faster than the data can come in then what will is there will be no need for L2 chache. but that will never happen becasue as soon as that happens they will increase the band width of the bus to the cpu bang were back into the problem of needing mem on the cpu. Cobra_R is spot on you wont notice any increase in speed for spread sheets and web pages. infact if you where to buy a pc today thats brand spanking new top of the range and i gave you a old pc thats 3 years old with its native os you'll be hard pushed to notice the performace diffrence speed wise. oh and if you only browse web sites that are text and send emails then that 16meg broadband conections masivly over kill as well(but thats another gripe) now what really kicks your cpu and makes it work is video rendering or simulation. games being something that deals with most of these eliments to a extent. 3d graphics packages are the worst for this as they deal with both. but my stance is the article is wrong. since there logic is if you cant see it it dosent happen. in the same logic man is faster than a car. man can go for 0-10 miles an hour in one step so almost instantly. car cant. so man wins therfore man is faster. all text needs typos. There there for the reader to find,to distract them from the total lack of content. google it! wasnt the answer to the question i asked so dont be dense and give me that repl

I don't see it that way. I see their benchmarks posting the same programs with the same speed, but instead each processors L2 Caches is diff. It shows you how L2 cache can truly make a diff on power hungry programs while other programs that' aren't power hungry it makes little diff if no diff at all. So the old saying still holds true to this. It's all about what you do with your computer.

L2 and L3 Cache is very important to the overall speed of the system. The more info that can be cached, the faster info can be processed. High end server CPU's have always had huge chunks of cache memory available for this very reason. If anyone remembers the PowerMac 6100. It is a good example of just how cache performance can effect a system other than raw CPU performance. If a user installed 1mb cache module in the system, the system would store all 640K of video memory(decent for those days) in the cache module. This resulted in an increase of around 50%(or more) in on screen drawing speed if I remember correctly. Cache = important