I have one server with 2.66Ghz P4 processor 1024kb cache, IDE hd. I've just bought a new server to replace the old one; a 2.8Ghz P4 with 512kb cache / SATA hd.
Is there any reason to be concerned at the smaller cache? Will it make much of a difference, bearing in mind that the server will be doing regular images conversions and a few small video conversions, daily?
You probably wont notice much if any difference in the real world.
From what I understand, the L2 cache is a place where the CPU stores frequently used resources, and the larger it is the less it has to go to the RAM to get it (simple explination). Someone correct me if I'm wrong...
It depends... For very CPU/Memory bound tasks (such as complex SQL queries where all the data is currently in RAM/disc-cache, number-crunching over large data-sets, simulations/games, ...) it can make a significant difference.
Though in a web hosting environment I would doubt that, overall, the difference will be massively noticable. If it is a case of deciding to pay more for the bigger cache, you might be better to instead consider putting the money into getting more RAM.
It will depend a lot on what you'd consider a "significant" difference...
For each image conversion or video conversions you might save a fraction of a second or maybe even up to a few seconds... but does that little of a difference really matter? That might depend on what you mean by "regular" as the more frequent and often it's doing those types of tasks... the more it would make sence to have a larger cache.
Lightwave, I'd have stuck with the older machine if it hadn't been for the fact it was migrated to the dreaded Webhostplus. I was wondering if there was a 'significant' difference more than anything. If it's down fractions of a second then it doesn't concern me so much. And by regular, I mean every few minutes or so.