Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 05:29:17 01/30/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 29, 2002 at 14:27:56, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On January 28, 2002 at 15:53:30, Roy Eassa wrote: > >>On January 28, 2002 at 15:32:23, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>Something that's interesting is that HIARCS used to run much faster on a Mac >>>than on a PC, and I believe the reason was the much larger L2 cache on the Mac. >>>So this big L3 cache will probably help for HIARCS again. I doubt it would give >>>much benefit for other chess programs, though. Most data I've seen indicates >>>that chess programs run almost as well on Celerons and Durons with very small L2 >>>caches as they do on the cachier Pentiums and Athlons. >>> >>>-Tom >> >> >>Thank you for the info. I indeed thought I had heard that, MHz for MHz, Hiarcs >>7 for the PowerPC was quite a bit stronger than Hiarcs 7 for the Intel/AMD >>chips. And doesn't the PowerPC have a larger L1 cache still, or is that no >>longer true? > >L1 caches, IIRC: >G3/G4: 32k >P3: 32k >P4: 8k + trace cache >Athlon: 128k > >-Tom P4's instruction cache is more than ok as they store different, but the g4 how many bytes/instruction does it need for L1 cache and with regard to datacache how big is a cacheline in the g4?
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.