I read it somewhere else, but I couldn't remember the links now.
However, the poster's argument was that Athlon X2, although the first monolithic dual core processor, acts more like Pentium D, due to its individual L2 cache. With non-connecting L2 cache, X2 cannot share information between cores via cache, and can only communicate each other via Crossbar.
On the other hand, Core 2 Duo has a sharing L2 cache, with 2Mb capacity. With such big L2 cache, not only it can minimize the bottleneck caused by the aging FSB, but the processor is more efficent because the L2 will auto adjust itself to accomondate the information being processed by the cores.
I'm wondering if this theory is correct. Thanks in advance in clearing this up. Also, please don't flame each other. If you want to rebut this theory, please don't just post something like "AMD rocks, Intel sucks."
However, the poster's argument was that Athlon X2, although the first monolithic dual core processor, acts more like Pentium D, due to its individual L2 cache. With non-connecting L2 cache, X2 cannot share information between cores via cache, and can only communicate each other via Crossbar.
On the other hand, Core 2 Duo has a sharing L2 cache, with 2Mb capacity. With such big L2 cache, not only it can minimize the bottleneck caused by the aging FSB, but the processor is more efficent because the L2 will auto adjust itself to accomondate the information being processed by the cores.
I'm wondering if this theory is correct. Thanks in advance in clearing this up. Also, please don't flame each other. If you want to rebut this theory, please don't just post something like "AMD rocks, Intel sucks."