Increase L2 Cache or Clock Speed?

Hello,

I'm configuring a new Micron Computer, and would like your help making a
decision about the processor. I wrote to Intel (haven't heard back yet),
and would also appreciate your input.
.................
Note to Intel about processor choice:
In purchasing a new Micron Desktop, I'd like your advice. Your web site
recommends the processor category for my uses that Micron offers: "Intel®
Pentium® 4 Processor
Supporting Hyper-Threading Technology." Would I get more bang for my buck
by increasing the L2 Cache from 1 MB to 2 MB, or by increasing the clock
speed from 3.2 to 3.4 MHz? I can make one upgrade.
.................

This is the system I'm looking at:
http://www.mpccorp.com/home/store/co...config=1381251

Is there general wisdom about cache vs. clock speed? I'm not a gamer, but
do multitask and can bog down 98 SE with open browsers/windows.

Thank you for any suggestions,
Ellen Hall

The increase from 1 MB to 2 MB of L2 cache will yield a MUCH greater
increase in performance than the move from 3.2 GHz to 3.4 GHz.
--
DaveW
__________

"Ellen Hall" wrote in message
. net...
Hello,

I'm configuring a new Micron Computer, and would like your help making a
decision about the processor. I wrote to Intel (haven't heard back yet),
and would also appreciate your input.
................
Note to Intel about processor choice:
In purchasing a new Micron Desktop, I'd like your advice. Your web site
recommends the processor category for my uses that Micron offers: "Intel®
Pentium® 4 Processor
Supporting Hyper-Threading Technology." Would I get more bang for my buck
by increasing the L2 Cache from 1 MB to 2 MB, or by increasing the clock
speed from 3.2 to 3.4 MHz? I can make one upgrade.
................

This is the system I'm looking at:
http://www.mpccorp.com/home/store/co...config=1381251

Is there general wisdom about cache vs. clock speed? I'm not a gamer, but
do multitask and can bog down 98 SE with open browsers/windows.

Thank you for any suggestions,
Ellen Hall

Thank you, Dave! That would have been my guess, but I found it difficult to
confirm. People just don't stand around talking about cache vs. clock speed
as much as I'd like.

I appreciate the post.
Ellen

"DaveW" wrote in message
...
The increase from 1 MB to 2 MB of L2 cache will yield a MUCH greater
increase in performance than the move from 3.2 GHz to 3.4 GHz.
--
DaveW
__________

"Ellen Hall" wrote in message
. net...
Hello,

I'm configuring a new Micron Computer, and would like your help making a
decision about the processor. I wrote to Intel (haven't heard back
yet),
and would also appreciate your input.
................
Note to Intel about processor choice:
In purchasing a new Micron Desktop, I'd like your advice. Your web site
recommends the processor category for my uses that Micron offers:
"Intel®
Pentium® 4 Processor
Supporting Hyper-Threading Technology." Would I get more bang for my
buck
by increasing the L2 Cache from 1 MB to 2 MB, or by increasing the clock
speed from 3.2 to 3.4 MHz? I can make one upgrade.
................

This is the system I'm looking at:
http://www.mpccorp.com/home/store/co...config=1381251

Is there general wisdom about cache vs. clock speed? I'm not a gamer,
but
do multitask and can bog down 98 SE with open browsers/windows.

Thank you for any suggestions,
Ellen Hall

Hi Ellen,

I took a look at your proposed system configuration and see that it's
set up for only 256MB RAM. I also see that you bog down a Win98 system
with several open browsers and windows.

I believe (I'm sure others will agree) that you're not going to solve
the "bogging" problem with a faster processor or larger cache with a
WinXP system that has only 256MB RAM.

Please consider 512MB or even 1GB. I see that if you click on the
drop-down menu in the Memory section they're offering a free upgrade to
512MB. They also have a free upgrade to a larger drive.

Lance
*****

Ellen Hall thought carefully and wrote on 9/18/2005 7:42 AM:
Hello,

I'm configuring a new Micron Computer, and would like your help making a
decision about the processor. I wrote to Intel (haven't heard back yet),
and would also appreciate your input.
................
Note to Intel about processor choice:
In purchasing a new Micron Desktop, I'd like your advice. Your web site
recommends the processor category for my uses that Micron offers: "Intel®
Pentium® 4 Processor
Supporting Hyper-Threading Technology." Would I get more bang for my buck
by increasing the L2 Cache from 1 MB to 2 MB, or by increasing the clock
speed from 3.2 to 3.4 MHz? I can make one upgrade.
................

This is the system I'm looking at:
http://www.mpccorp.com/home/store/co...config=1381251

Is there general wisdom about cache vs. clock speed? I'm not a gamer, but
do multitask and can bog down 98 SE with open browsers/windows.

Thank you for any suggestions,
Ellen Hall

Ellen Hall wrote:
Thank you, Dave! That would have been my guess, but I found it difficult to
confirm. People just don't stand around talking about cache vs. clock speed
as much as I'd like.

I appreciate the post.
Ellen


Gotta admit, it's not exactly the stuff of water-cooler conversations. :-)

Yousuf Khan

Ellen Hall wrote:
Hello,

I'm configuring a new Micron Computer, and would like your help making a
decision about the processor. I wrote to Intel (haven't heard back yet),
and would also appreciate your input.
................
Note to Intel about processor choice:
In purchasing a new Micron Desktop, I'd like your advice. Your web site
recommends the processor category for my uses that Micron offers: "Intel®
Pentium® 4 Processor
Supporting Hyper-Threading Technology." Would I get more bang for my buck
by increasing the L2 Cache from 1 MB to 2 MB, or by increasing the clock
speed from 3.2 to 3.4 MHz? I can make one upgrade.
................

This is the system I'm looking at:
http://www.mpccorp.com/home/store/co...config=1381251

Is there general wisdom about cache vs. clock speed? I'm not a gamer, but
do multitask and can bog down 98 SE with open browsers/windows.

Add memory. The CPU speed increase will be hard to see, and with that
little memory the extra cache will probably not help much either. Invest
in 1GB of memory, two if you have a four slot MB and can use inexpensive
512MB RAM. Avoiding swapping to disk, five orders of magnitude slower
than RAM, will be the biggest win for "feels faster."

--
bill davidsen
SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com

Thank you Lance and Bill for the suggestion about adding memory. Someone
was good enough to point out to me that going straight to Crucial for my
memory ("a 1 GB kit [2 x 512 MB] is $122.99") would be a better deal than
asking Micron to upgrade to 1 GB (a $399 upgrade). So, yes, I'd considered
it and didn't include it in my post.

I did get an email back from Intel today. The gist of it:

"...Please contact the manufacturer of your new Desktop Board for potential
upgrade paths. The Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) may use their own
specification of motherboard. For this reason we are unable to recommend
any Intel boxed product that would integrate into your OEM computer. The
manufacturer of your system may be able to provide you with a list of Intel
parts that are compatible with your computer or provide you with their own
upgrade information. The OEM may also be able to provide you with purchase
information on compatible products."

The Advisor Tool at Crucial okay'd a handful of compatible choices for the
Micron Millennia 940i. It's been awhile since I've swapped out memory.
Aside from the basic instructions about what not to mix with what, do you
have any thoughts I should keep in mind? Bill, you mentioned putting in 2
GB if I can use inexpensive 512MB RAM. Was the "inexpensive" part simply
the ability to purchase a larger amount?

I really appreciate your responding. Newsgroups are a gift.
Thank you!
Ellen

"Bill Davidsen" wrote in message
news
Ellen Hall wrote:
Hello,

I'm configuring a new Micron Computer, and would like your help making a
decision about the processor. I wrote to Intel (haven't heard back
yet),
and would also appreciate your input.
................
Note to Intel about processor choice:
In purchasing a new Micron Desktop, I'd like your advice. Your web site
recommends the processor category for my uses that Micron offers:
"Intel®
Pentium® 4 Processor
Supporting Hyper-Threading Technology." Would I get more bang for my
buck
by increasing the L2 Cache from 1 MB to 2 MB, or by increasing the clock
speed from 3.2 to 3.4 MHz? I can make one upgrade.
................

This is the system I'm looking at:
http://www.mpccorp.com/home/store/co...config=1381251

Is there general wisdom about cache vs. clock speed? I'm not a gamer,
but
do multitask and can bog down 98 SE with open browsers/windows.

Add memory. The CPU speed increase will be hard to see, and with that
little memory the extra cache will probably not help much either. Invest
in 1GB of memory, two if you have a four slot MB and can use inexpensive
512MB RAM. Avoiding swapping to disk, five orders of magnitude slower
than RAM, will be the biggest win for "feels faster."

--
bill davidsen
SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com

The user manual for the 940i is here (EMA001048-00):
http://support.mpccorp.com/apps/manu...=382&Categ=191
This has the exact memory requirements and installation instructions.

As you mention below, stay with the kits. This is a dual channel board
that requires matching RAM in each channel. When you install your kit
make sure the two RAM modules go in the blue slots OR the black slots.

You should be very happy with this setup. I presume you're now using an
older Win98 machine of a few 100MHz - this new system will take your
breath away.

Lance
*****

Ellen Hall thought carefully and wrote on 9/19/2005 8:17 PM:
Thank you Lance and Bill for the suggestion about adding memory. Someone
was good enough to point out to me that going straight to Crucial for my
memory ("a 1 GB kit [2 x 512 MB] is $122.99") would be a better deal than
asking Micron to upgrade to 1 GB (a $399 upgrade). So, yes, I'd considered
it and didn't include it in my post.

I did get an email back from Intel today. The gist of it:

"...Please contact the manufacturer of your new Desktop Board for potential
upgrade paths. The Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) may use their own
specification of motherboard. For this reason we are unable to recommend
any Intel boxed product that would integrate into your OEM computer. The
manufacturer of your system may be able to provide you with a list of Intel
parts that are compatible with your computer or provide you with their own
upgrade information. The OEM may also be able to provide you with purchase
information on compatible products."

The Advisor Tool at Crucial okay'd a handful of compatible choices for the
Micron Millennia 940i. It's been awhile since I've swapped out memory.
Aside from the basic instructions about what not to mix with what, do you
have any thoughts I should keep in mind? Bill, you mentioned putting in 2
GB if I can use inexpensive 512MB RAM. Was the "inexpensive" part simply
the ability to purchase a larger amount?

I really appreciate your responding. Newsgroups are a gift.
Thank you!
Ellen

"Bill Davidsen" wrote in message
news
Ellen Hall wrote:

Hello,

I'm configuring a new Micron Computer, and would like your help making a
decision about the processor. I wrote to Intel (haven't heard back

yet),

and would also appreciate your input.
................
Note to Intel about processor choice:
In purchasing a new Micron Desktop, I'd like your advice. Your web site
recommends the processor category for my uses that Micron offers:

"Intel®

Pentium® 4 Processor
Supporting Hyper-Threading Technology." Would I get more bang for my

buck

by increasing the L2 Cache from 1 MB to 2 MB, or by increasing the clock
speed from 3.2 to 3.4 MHz? I can make one upgrade.
................

This is the system I'm looking at:
http://www.mpccorp.com/home/store/co...config=1381251

Is there general wisdom about cache vs. clock speed? I'm not a gamer,

but

do multitask and can bog down 98 SE with open browsers/windows.

Add memory. The CPU speed increase will be hard to see, and with that
little memory the extra cache will probably not help much either. Invest
in 1GB of memory, two if you have a four slot MB and can use inexpensive
512MB RAM. Avoiding swapping to disk, five orders of magnitude slower
than RAM, will be the biggest win for "feels faster."

--
bill davidsen
SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com

I'm downloading the manual as we speak (dial-up). Yes, I've been using a
733 MHz 98 SE machine since 2000. I waited till the 133 FSB came out so I
could be the first on my block. And I was, for a few minutes. I can't
imagine how different it will be.

I'm looking forward to having my breath taken away. Thanks for the link. I
hadn't gotten that far.

Ellen

"Lance" wrote in message
k.net...
The user manual for the 940i is here (EMA001048-00):
http://support.mpccorp.com/apps/manu...=382&Categ=191
This has the exact memory requirements and installation instructions.

As you mention below, stay with the kits. This is a dual channel board
that requires matching RAM in each channel. When you install your kit
make sure the two RAM modules go in the blue slots OR the black slots.

You should be very happy with this setup. I presume you're now using an
older Win98 machine of a few 100MHz - this new system will take your
breath away.

Lance
*****

Ellen Hall thought carefully and wrote on 9/19/2005 8:17 PM:
Thank you Lance and Bill for the suggestion about adding memory.
Someone
was good enough to point out to me that going straight to Crucial for my
memory ("a 1 GB kit [2 x 512 MB] is $122.99") would be a better deal
than
asking Micron to upgrade to 1 GB (a $399 upgrade). So, yes, I'd
considered
it and didn't include it in my post.

I did get an email back from Intel today. The gist of it:

"...Please contact the manufacturer of your new Desktop Board for
potential
upgrade paths. The Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) may use their
own
specification of motherboard. For this reason we are unable to
recommend
any Intel boxed product that would integrate into your OEM computer.
The
manufacturer of your system may be able to provide you with a list of
Intel
parts that are compatible with your computer or provide you with their
own
upgrade information. The OEM may also be able to provide you with
purchase
information on compatible products."

The Advisor Tool at Crucial okay'd a handful of compatible choices for
the
Micron Millennia 940i. It's been awhile since I've swapped out memory.
Aside from the basic instructions about what not to mix with what, do
you
have any thoughts I should keep in mind? Bill, you mentioned putting in
2
GB if I can use inexpensive 512MB RAM. Was the "inexpensive" part
simply
the ability to purchase a larger amount?

I really appreciate your responding. Newsgroups are a gift.
Thank you!
Ellen

"Bill Davidsen" wrote in message
news
Ellen Hall wrote:

Hello,

I'm configuring a new Micron Computer, and would like your help making
a
decision about the processor. I wrote to Intel (haven't heard back

yet),

and would also appreciate your input.
................
Note to Intel about processor choice:
In purchasing a new Micron Desktop, I'd like your advice. Your web
site
recommends the processor category for my uses that Micron offers:

"Intel®

Pentium® 4 Processor
Supporting Hyper-Threading Technology." Would I get more bang for my

buck

by increasing the L2 Cache from 1 MB to 2 MB, or by increasing the
clock
speed from 3.2 to 3.4 MHz? I can make one upgrade.
................

This is the system I'm looking at:
http://www.mpccorp.com/home/store/co...config=1381251

Is there general wisdom about cache vs. clock speed? I'm not a gamer,

but

do multitask and can bog down 98 SE with open browsers/windows.

Add memory. The CPU speed increase will be hard to see, and with that
little memory the extra cache will probably not help much either. Invest
in 1GB of memory, two if you have a four slot MB and can use inexpensive
512MB RAM. Avoiding swapping to disk, five orders of magnitude slower
than RAM, will be the biggest win for "feels faster."

--
bill davidsen
SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com

Ellen Hall wrote:
I'm downloading the manual as we speak (dial-up). Yes, I've been using a
733 MHz 98 SE machine since 2000. I waited till the 133 FSB came out so I
could be the first on my block. And I was, for a few minutes. I can't
imagine how different it will be.

I'm looking forward to having my breath taken away. Thanks for the link. I
hadn't gotten that far.

You waited a while to update that rig, didn't you? Why didn't you just
keep updating components one at a time along the way? That way you
wouldn't need to upgrade all at once. Though the days of it being
cheaper to build your own complete system vs. buying it are long over,
it is still more cost-effective to upgrade most individual pieces one
at a time, e.g. RAM, hard disk, optical disk drive,
motherboard/processor, operating system, etc. It's usually less
disruptive, and you get to experience newer technology along the way.
For example with your existing rig, if you had doubled the RAM within
the first two years, then you would've had a system quite capable of
running Windows 2000 and eventually XP, instead of having stay with Win
98 a good long three years past its retirement date. Then eventually
you could've upgraded to newer motherboards and processors.

Yousuf Khan