[gmx-users] 8MB CPU cache vs 4MB CPU cache: large difference in performance?

[Yang Ye]

Cache size matters because it ensures a steady data/instruction flow to feed the "hungry" CPU, especially with Intel Coreo architecture. With database-type application, larger cache benefits much. In case of GROMACS, unless you deal with very large system, I doubt its effectiveness. It could be better to run some real-world benchmarks. Or look for benchmark that contains software operating in a similar way of GROMACS, e.g. scientific benchmark, multimedia benchmark (decoding/3D rendering, with SSE boost).
 
Regards,
Yang Ye



----- Original Message ----
From: Frankie Montenegro <frankie.montenegro at gmail.com>
To: gmx-users at gromacs.org
Sent: Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:08:54 AM
Subject: [gmx-users] 8MB CPU cache vs 4MB CPU cache: large difference in performance?


Hi,

I am about to purchase several units with Intel's quadcore q6600
processors. Since about 80% of our work is done with Gromacs, I
figured this list is a place to ask performance questions.

I was wondering if there would be any significant benefit in having a
q6600 processor with 8MBof L2 cache over the identical processor
with 4MB of L2 cache. The price difference is about 60$,which doesn't
seem much,  but could pile up if we end up buying more then a few units.

Thanks for your help.
_______________________________________________
gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users at gromacs.org
http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before posting!
Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the 
www interface or send it to gmx-users-request at gromacs.org.
Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://maillist.sys.kth.se/pipermail/gromacs.org_gmx-users/attachments/20070909/3da15772/attachment.html>