1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Dual Processor or Single Processor with more cache?

Discussion in 'Intel' started by PartiPooper, Sep 21, 2004.

  1. PartiPooper

    PartiPooper Guest

    I'm in the process of configuring a W2k server for general file/print
    sharing and for the same price have the choice of;

    A Single Xeon 3.06 w/1MB cache or a dual Xeon 3.06 Ghz w/512K cache
    each

    Anyone know which would be better? I assume the dual processor but
    it's only a guess.

    Thanks
    PartiPooper, Sep 21, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "PartiPooper" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I'm in the process of configuring a W2k server for general file/print
    > sharing and for the same price have the choice of;
    >
    > A Single Xeon 3.06 w/1MB cache or a dual Xeon 3.06 Ghz w/512K cache
    > each
    >
    > Anyone know which would be better? I assume the dual processor but
    > it's only a guess.
    >
    > Thanks


    My personal preference would be dual, but that's just me and it would depend
    on the type of work that you do.

    Carlo
    Carlo Razzeto, Sep 22, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. PartiPooper

    JK Guest

    Why not go with dual Opterons instead?

    PartiPooper wrote:

    > I'm in the process of configuring a W2k server for general file/print
    > sharing and for the same price have the choice of;
    >
    > A Single Xeon 3.06 w/1MB cache or a dual Xeon 3.06 Ghz w/512K cache
    > each
    >
    > Anyone know which would be better? I assume the dual processor but
    > it's only a guess.
    >
    > Thanks
    JK, Sep 22, 2004
    #3
  4. PartiPooper

    Alex Johnson Guest

    PartiPooper wrote:
    > I'm in the process of configuring a W2k server for general file/print
    > sharing and for the same price have the choice of;
    >
    > A Single Xeon 3.06 w/1MB cache or a dual Xeon 3.06 Ghz w/512K cache
    > each
    >
    > Anyone know which would be better? I assume the dual processor but
    > it's only a guess.
    >
    > Thanks


    While file and print sharing should require neither of those high-octane
    configurations, the more powerful one is the dual Xeon. The larger
    cache one is Nocona, based on Prescott, while the smaller one is
    Prestonia, based on Northwood. If you follow the discussion here, you
    will learn that most people consider Northwood faster than the larger
    cache Prescott due to other design decisions. So one of those alone
    would be better, but you can get two! :)

    Alex
    --
    My words are my own. They represent no other; they belong to no other.
    Don't read anything into them or you may be required to compensate me
    for violation of copyright. (I do not speak for my employer.)
    Alex Johnson, Sep 22, 2004
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Chas.
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    2,943
    Chas.
    Aug 11, 2003
  2. Chas.
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    658
    Chas.
    Aug 11, 2003
  3. CharlesBlackstone

    Opteron - single dual core vs two single cores

    CharlesBlackstone, Aug 5, 2006, in forum: AMD Overclocking
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    1,162
    Scott Alfter
    Aug 19, 2006
  4. Steve

    2mb cache vs 8mb cache?

    Steve, Dec 30, 2003, in forum: Hardware
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    346
    Steve
    Dec 30, 2003
  5. Robert
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    526
    Robert
    Jul 6, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page