Author: Torstein Hall
Date: 14:27:45 06/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 2000 at 17:01:36, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On June 13, 2000 at 15:55:24, Mogens Larsen wrote: > >>On June 13, 2000 at 15:41:51, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>No, Thunderbird is a few % faster than an Athlon at same MHz. >>> >>>Duron is exactly the same as Tbird, but with 1/4 the L2 cache (64k). >>> >>>-Tom >> >>I've just purchased an ordinary Athlon. What are the advantages and >>disadvantages with a smaller cache size. BTW, are the L2 cache of the >>Thunderbird and the Athlon fullspeed? >> >>Best wishes... >>Mogens > >The Tbird and Duron both have on-die "full speed" L2 caches, but they are not >that much faster than the old off-die caches. Most benchmark scores improve by a >few percent, but nothing like when Intel moved the PIII cache on-die. > >The main benefit of the on-die cache is that it makes the processors much >cheaper to manufacture. Another, less significant benefit is that the cache >performance can now scale with the processor performance. > >-Tom Why was it so much more important for the PIII to get the cach on-die? Torstein
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.