Manchester 4600+ vs. Toledo 4400+

I've been working on a hardware upgrade for a customer. I quoted him a price for the Athlon 64 x2 4400+ Toledo, but have been waiting on the okay from him before I ordered it. Well, I got the okay today, and it just so happens that the supplier I'm ordering from is out of stock on that particular processor.

I've taken the liberty of researching comparable processors in the same price range, and I've come across the Athlon 64 x2 4600+ Manchester. The only differences I see are:

• Clock Speed: The Manchester is 2.4GHz, whereas the Toledo is 2.2GHz
• L2 Cache size: The Manchester is 512KB per core, whereas the Toledo is 1024KB per core

My question is this: Since the Manchester has a higher clock speed than the Toledo, will the difference in cache seem unimportant in the long run?

The use of the computer is going to be general web surfing, video capture, and some gaming.

those processors are very very close, i really think you will find almost no difference in speed, I'm sure they can each beat the other is some tasks, but right now i can't find any benches comparing them, i don't think you could tell the difference unless the systems were being tested side by side

i would just inform the customer and tell them and just say there should be no noticeable difference, but they could pick another CPU if they want

Well, the customer's knowledge of computers is probably a "2" on a scale of 1 to 10. He really wouldn't understand what level 2 cache was, even if I spent an hour explaining it to him. He's basically given me liberty to order what I think would be good for him, so I went ahead and ordered the Manchester.

Thanks for the advice!