CPU speed/L2 cache for video processing?

[sfcav]

Hi All:

I'm upgrading my HTPC (Intel 845 chipset) with a focus on video processing (ffdshow, Avisynth, etc). Other than fastest/latest/greatest, is CPU speed (256 L2 cache) the most important characteristic or would a lower speed/higher L2 cache (512, 1M) actually be faster??

Thanks in advance,

Steve

[pelle412]

sfcav:

L2 cache size matters for video encoding up to a certain point. I used to have a Northwood Celeron 2.8 GHz w/ 128K L2 cache and it was not very fast at video encoding. I know that the Celeron D w/ 256K L2 cache has a significant speed advantage over the older Celerons. So what about > 256K L2 cache? I believe once you have 256K L2 cache, upgrading to 512K or 1MB produces only minor advantages (assuming Intel CPUs). In this case, clock speed may be your best bet. In case of video games, L2 cache sizes > 256K will definitely be faster.

Personally, I use a AMD XP2800 (2.08Ghz) and a P4 3.0Ghz (prescott) system and they are pretty much equally fast at video encoding. If you feel like upgrading your motherboard as well as CPU, I'd actually go for am AMD64 system. AMD64 3200+ CPU is not too expensive (~$200).

[sfcav]

Thanks pelle412!

[Pookie]

I second that. The AMD 64 3200 is a great proc, especially for the price.

[zilog jones]

The new dual core processors could prove to be a great advantage for multitasking while processing, and when more programs are designed for dual cores things can only get even better. The Athlon 64 X2 and Intel's dual core processors will supposedly be out some time this year, but God knows how much they'll cost...