RE: L2 cache vs. faster processor

From: Looney, Jason <Jason.Looney_at_echostar.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:03:16 -0600
Message-ID: <B8C9CF34B3F7164282C8610C93BB94AF04C6311C@riv-exchb1.echostar.com>

I don't believe that Intel makes a 3.06 GHz Xeon without a level 2 cache. I think it has a L2 cache of 512K. Anyway, both chips will perform similarly in most real world applications, including as an Oracle DB Server.

Jason.

-----Original Message-----

From: Terry Sutton [mailto:terrysutton_at_usa.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 1:23 PM
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: L2 cache vs. faster processor

A client is ordering hardware for an Oracle on Linux system, and has to choose between 2.8 GHz Xeon processors with 1MB L2 cache and 3.06 GHz Xeon processors (no L2 cache). Does anyone have any recommendations on the value of L2 cache vs. a faster processor?
--Terry

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--

Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/

FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html


-----------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com


----------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe send email to:  oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org

put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--

Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html

Received on Wed Jul 14 2004 - 15:02:07 CDT