I am not a real technical wizard, but have been reading some of the forum threads. I will soon be having a local PC shop built a fairly high-end system. Their recommendations include a 939 socket AMD 3500+ system, PCI express MSI motherboard, with a hot new off-the-shelf ATI X800XL 256 MB video card and 1 gig RAM.Since the AMD 3500+ processor has 512 KB (and not 1 MB) L2 cache, should this be a concern? I had read that 1 MB is better, but maybe with a system this high-end, that is really wouldn

I honestly don't think you'll see a stunning difference with that type of system. If you were lacking RAM, then maybe. Of course it's always nice to have higher cache, but I think your system will be fine without the other 512K cache on the processor.

I just got a new Barton (512mb cache) CPU for my KT400 motherboard. At the default set up in Seattle with all sliders maxed and visability in weather set to 30 miles, I get one whopping frame per second increase (from 11.5 in my 2250 256 L2 cache TB Athlon XP to 12.5 in my new processor set at the same speed 13.5x166). So that's a direct 512 vs. 256 L2 cache for you. There is just not enough info concerning hardware and FS2004 out there!Hope it helped.RH

That is almost a 10 % performance increase ;). So really if you look at that you get one #### of a boost ;).Yes extra cache do help a lot. it

That is true, any improvement is a good improvement with a stingy program like FS2004. At this point, I am trying to figure out whether I should send this Barton back and get a Athlon 64 system. I just don't want the hassle of having to reload everything. Although, if I decided to stay with a VIA chipset, I should, in theory, be able just to pop the HD into the new computer without having to reload everything.RH

Well the bang for the buck on a mobile Barton is hard to beat. If you get it up to 2,6 or 2,7 area it really performs well for little cost :)Then it

Thanks guys for all the great comments. So many decisions to make. I am actually now on the fence between getting the AMD 3500+ (939) or possibly the AMD 3400+ or 3700+ (754). I am leaning towards one of the 754 chips because of the more proven established boards. I know the 3400+ is the much better buy and the 3700+ appears not cost effective. Within the next week, I have to 'get off of the pot' and make a decision.

Yeah seem like a good choice. However try to get a Clawhammer with CG stepping. Then you can choose from 1T and 2T timings. Also mobile chips are better for overclocking however then you will have to make sure you get a mainboard with a bios that supports them. They wheren