Thanks to dippy_skoodlez from OCForums for spreading and all4AMD from XS as the original writer.
Take a look:
OCForums' ">http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=354718

I did notice a slightly better performance, did not benchmark yet, busy burning in my CPU.

Comments would be appreciated.

-------------------------
quote:A.M.D = All Men Desire.

System:HEC 475Watt.AMD Athlon XP-M2500 IQYHA0351MPMW.
Abit NF7v2*Sp97*NB1+delta*A-DATA DDR500
MSI 'the rock' RX9800*WD800JB
*257x10@1.83V*261x10@1.9V (CPC off)

That tweak is quite old, but I don't know whether it works or not. Some say it doesn't, and I might have to agree with that. I've tried it, and saw no noticable difference. I think as long as the cache is recognized by your BIOS, and or a 3rd party program, it's fine or enabled.

-------------------------
MODERATOR

The opinions expressed above do not represent those of Advanced Micro Devices or any of their affiliates.

Detailed Explanation of SecondLevelDataCache' ">http://support.microsoft.com/?id=183063

"This is not related to the hardware; it is only useful for computers with direct-mapped L2 caches. Pentium II and later processors do not have direct-mapped L2 caches."

AMD processors haven't used direct-mapped L2 caches since K6. With today's set-associative L2 caches, the operating system doesn't know nor does it care how much L2 cache a processor has. It is concerned only with the set-associativity of the L2 cache (e.g. 4-way, 8-way, 16-way, etc.). Changing this registry value does nothing for systems using modern processors.